Do you think we can eliminate the use of coal within 15 years?

Question

Do you think we can eliminate the use of coal within 15 years?

Answer 1

Probably not. Unless alternative sources of energy become much, much cheaper and more widely available, not just to larger and wealthier countries like the US, but also to third world countries, coal will always remain the more economically rational choice. I honestly can't see it ever being replaced, that is, until the supply runs out, and that's definitely not happening any time soon.

Answer 2

probably if the price of coal manages to rise high enough. 15 years seem too short, but nobody really knows until 15 years later

Answer 3

why would we do that there is enough coal to last for decades.

Answer 4

No. Most of our electrical power is currently produced with coal.

Second is nuclear power and it is only about 10% nationwide which is the only source we already have the technology to expand to meet all of our electrical needs.

The problem is that in order to eliminate coal with current known technology we would have to build quite a few nuclear plants all over the country.

And with all the regulations and environmental permits required to build a new nuke plant it could well take over 15 years to build them once the country was convinced it was even necessary.

Answer 5

While it is true that we have lots of coal, we can always use it when we have better technology to use it cleanly.

No I don't think we will eliminate it in 15 years.

We can switch to alternatives in time to avert the worst effects of our contribution to global warming.

http://www.setamericafree.org/blueprint....

A Blueprint For U.S. Energy Security

This has sound ideas for achieving energy independence.  One thing they recommend is mass production of PHEVs or Plug In Hybrid cars.

We would average 100mpg with current technology.  The average commuter would do most of their commuting, if not all, on battery power.  At current electric rates, it would cost only $1 to recharge for the next days commute.

The average driver would get 60% of their driving on battery power.

Recharging at night is something the grid can handle, and it's cleaner overall, even now, than burning gasoline.

Plug in Partners -  advocacy group for PHEVs

http://www.pluginpartners.org/

Solar and Wind could generate the bulk of our energy at competitive costs.

Photovoltaics, or PV, are on average, within 2-5 years of achieving grid parity, or competitive pricing with gas and coal.

In fact one company claims to already be there.

"Nanosolar’s founder and chief executive, Martin Roscheisen, claims to be the first solar panel manufacturer to be able to profitably sell solar panels for less than $1 a watt. That is the price at which solar energy becomes less expensive than coal.

With a $1-per-watt panel,” he said, “it is possible to build $2-per-watt systems.

According to the Energy Department, building a new coal plant costs about $2.1 a watt, plus the cost of fuel and emissions, he said."

from http://www.grinzo.com/energy/index.php/c...

Solar thermal power plants and concentrating solar PV plants in the southwest could power the whole country using less land than now used for coal mining.

Scientific American  A Solar Grand Plan

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-so...

http://blogs.business2.com/greenwombat/

Stories about solar thermal plants being built in California, Nevada, Arizona, and other clean tech news.

http://www.ausra.com

"All of America's needs for electric power – the entire US grid, night and day – can be generated with Ausra's current technology using a square parcel of land 92 miles on a side. For comparison, this is less than 1% of America's deserts, less land than currently in use in the U.S. for coal mines."

"Solar thermal power plants such as Ausra's generate electricity by driving steam turbines with sunshine. Ausra's solar concentrators boil water with focused sunlight, and produce electricity at prices directly competitive with gas- and coal-fired electric power."

from Green Wombat

"In recent months, PG&E has signed deals for more than a gigawatt of electricity — enough to light more than 750,000 homes — with solar power plant developers."

"The solar thermal industry is in its infancy but utilities like PG&E (PCG), Southern California Edison (EIX) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SRE) have signed several contracts for solar power plants and negotiations for gigawatts more of solar electricity are ongoing."

"Solar energy is the great leveler (unlike oil, which has been the great divider) between the haves and the have nots). No one owns the sun. It can't be drilled or mined or tied up in financial derivatives."

(See Here Comes the Sun, February 17, 2007, Commentary, Chipstocktrader.com)

Solar thermal plants can store heat from the day and use it to generate electricity at night and when it's cloudy, which isn't very often in the southwest.

They can store hot water, molten salt, or compressed air.   Molten salt looks like a good solution, as it loses only 1% of it's heat in 24 hours.

"In the US, the American Wind Energy Association forecasts that installed capacity could grow from 11,603 MW today to around 100,000 MW by 2020. In Canada, Emerging Energy Research predicts that installed wind capacity will expand from around 1,500 MW today to around 14,000 MW by 2015."

{from an article at altenergystocks.com by Charles Morand}

It could expand quicker, with incentives.

Denmark gets 20% of their energy from wind.

Answer 6

Eliminating the use of coal would be foolish because the proven reserves are enough to last several centuries.  Higher energy costs are making a lot of "clean coal" technologies affordable now.  The point of this technology is to prevent the impurities in coal from getting to the atmosphere.  Burning raw coal releases many nasty substances into the atmosphere including soot, mercury, sulphur and nitrogen oxides.  The goal is to either remove these compounds before burning it, or "scrubbing" them out of the exhaust stream afterwards.  Both approaches have benefits and drawbacks.  Here are some of the "clean coal" technologies in use now:

1.  Scrubbing:  Equipment is installed in smokestacks to remove soot from the exhaust.

2.  Coal-to-gas:  This is the oldest "clean coal" technology, also known as "manufactured gas".  It fell into disuse by the 1950s as providers switched to natural gas.

3.  Coal-to-liquid:  In the 1920s, German chemists developed a process to produce liquid fuel from coal and it was widely used during WWII after the Allies destroyed their oilfields in Romania.  It is an expensive process but high oil prices are making it economically viable.

Answer 7

Not likely.   Very important in the production of steel.   Charcoal could be used, but that would entail cutting most of the US forests.

Answer 8

A short answer to a short Q.... Yes , BUT , It will not happen, It's actually going to increase...

Answer 9

eliminate it?  they are looking for ways to make it more environmental friendly.