quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Cheapest if you ignore the externalities. Which are not insignificant.

The problem with "externalities" is they can be grossly exaggerated is even outright fiction. For example, Global Warming.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by UTsig:
Can it get much worse?

I guess I'm not understanding what's bad about that picture.

It's one hill in a massive expanse of land. BFD. Should we not dig up and use the natural resources that we've been blessed with?

Looks kinda cool actually.

How else should we heat and light our homes? Unicorn farts? I hear those cause global warming.

My point was that it's already there and that the enviros are bringing back the same excuses. I care about my environment but not to the extent that I'd want something like this closed down. More important to me is when the likes of SUWA lobby the BLM to close access roads that have been there for years, they have a lot of power.

I've lived in SW Utah for 13 years and have seen substantial change. The New West is turning into an amenities based economy as opposed to an extractive one. It's not good for the local economies.

quote:

Originally posted by UTsig:
More important to me is when the likes of SUWA lobby the BLM to close access roads that have been there for years, they have a lot of power.

Bastards did it to us up here twenty-five years ago. Used to be you could drive just about anywhere there was a road. Then they began gating everything off "to protect wildlife". Can't get anywhere anymore unless you walk in.

quote:

Originally posted by ridewv:
Another advantage is when generating with gas it's a little easier to throttle back and ramp up as energy demand fluctuates, not so with coal.

I have a BIL and two nephews who work at Intermountain Power Plant (IPP) near Delta, UT. It is one of the largest coal-fired plants in the U.S., and being built in the 1980's along with constant upgrades, is also one of the cleanest. Notwithstanding this, it will be converting to NG in about seven years, mostly for political reasons since the plant is majority owned by the city of Los Angeles.

Anyway, he states just the opposite of your assertion. After the coal to NG conversion, the plant's output will be approximately 1/3 of its current rating. Furthermore, there is no real way to store the fuel. The plant is limited by the size of the pipe in, and cannot go above that. Coal, OTOH, is much more BTU dense, and can scale up easily and quickly. The coal is pulverized and injected into a fire plume, so the time to increase output is minimal.

One other big point. Coal can be stock-piled onsite. The plant can have a six month supply on hand to offset any disruptions to supply, such as a strike at the railroad or mine. NG cannot be stockpiled, so any disruption would cause an immediate disruption to the plant's power output. There is an effort underway near Delta to hollow out some salt formations, and pump them full of NG as an emergency reserve; however, there is no way to store enough to equal the current coal reserve.

Yes, if you are talking about small 100MW micro on-demand plants, then they can come online from a cold start much faster than coal. But those plants cannot be compared to a large 1900MW coal-fired backbone plant. These NG plants are supplemental, and would cause the grid to become unreliable if they were the sole supplier to the grid.