Coal Fired Power Plants 2010


Over the course of this year, more U.S. coal-fired power plants were tapped for retirement and more proposed plants were canceled than in 2009, according to an end-of-year report by the Sierra Club, which is fighting the continued use of coal.

 

Data collected by the advocacy group show that 38 coal plant projects were dropped or delayed in 2010, up from 26 the year before and 27 in 2008. Meanwhile, power producers announced plans to retire 48 existing plants this year, four times as many as in 2009 and 12 times as many as in the year before that.

The retirements announced this year would take 12,000 megawatts of coal-fired power off the grid — roughly 4 percent of the nation’s total coal-fired capacity and enough electricity to power about 6 million American homes.

Construction was not started on any new coal plants this year, as was the case last year, and the same situation is expected for 2011, the Sierra Club said. Environmentalists, who have sought to slow the construction of coal plants by challenging their permits and supporting strict new rules on the production and use of coal, see the numbers as a victory.

“Coal is a fuel of the past. What we’re seeing now is the beginning of growing trend to leave it there,” said Mary Anne Hitt, the director of the advocacy group’s “Beyond Coal” campaign, in a statement today.

From: Climate Progress, December 24, 2010

Tags: 2010, Coal, Fired, Plants, Power

Views: 108

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Max on December 28, 2010 at 3:59

sesport,

 

I think that power generation companies will begin to add NG fueled turbines at their existing coal base load units to increase efficiency.  Adding these turbines would help recover some of the heat loss.

The google spell check is still the best......

 

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 28, 2010 at 4:37
Max, most would say that a "repower" project is the only solution.  ie Replace the existing coal burners and steam turbines with new equipment.
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 28, 2010 at 4:45
Sesport, unfortunately some of the more extreme environmental groups oppose any form of fossil fuel including natural gas because they see it as impeding their renewables agenda.  Personally I believe a mix of natural gas, nuclear and wind/solar is the best long term supply solution.  On the flip side policies that promote improvements in efficiency (appliances, insulation, etc) are required to lessen power demand.  
Permalink Reply by w.r. frank on December 28, 2010 at 5:23
I have heard Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Power (the 3rd largest US CO2 emitter), say that as much as 40% of the low hanging fruit in emission reductions is efficiency. Jim is not a climate skeptic nor a denier. He is fighting hard for transitions that keep older coal fired plants in the mix (preserving Duke) and CCS subsidies from the US to find a technology that allows for coal in a lower carbon environment.Near term (15-20 years), It is hard to see a GROWTH future without all forms of energy-coal, NG, oil, nuclear, wind, solar, hydro and thermal-playing a role. And, yes, cost to the users will go up in that multi-source mix, but not nearly as much as some predict!
Permalink Reply by sesport on December 29, 2010 at 4:39

Les - I too believe it's going to end up being a mixed bag as resource availability dictates, as the consumers dictate (in demand for keeping costs down), and as the individual state governments decide.  For those promoting a renewable source, so be it.  But their renewable technology has to be manufactured, so those industries are going to need a fuel.

 

Now, I suppose power demand could be lessened on the residential home front if cogen heat/power weren't such a "dirty" word to some. (plug, plug, plug  - lol)

 

thanks for the thoughts,  80)

Permalink Reply by sesport on December 29, 2010 at 16:55

Les - I was just reading something else today and found that some renewables need rare earth elements.  We're about to get the squeeze on those, meaning it would be more difficult for us to grow some of our own renewables industries.  Unless the US, and those states with those resources, begin mining OR we find another source from which to import, the REE's needed may become in short supply and/or expensive.  Seems to me the renewables may now be in a quandry?

 

80)

Permalink Reply by DJG on December 29, 2010 at 5:46

 

Central Texas Coal Plant blamed in death/desease of nearby Oak/Pecan groves:

 

http://video.ap.org/?f=AP&pid=CV267VisUeafjx2_AtAUNyaTOVeEkLjE

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/28/farmers-pecan-growers-say_...

 

 

Permalink Reply by benny688 on December 29, 2010 at 7:59

When I was visiting family in Corpus Christi several weeks ago there was an interesting article about this on the local evening news.

 

The Las Brisas project is supposed to bring cheaper electricity to all by building a coal fired plant on Nueces Bay where coal can be brought in by shiploads from parts unknown.  It looks like the environmentalists are going to fight this to the death and it will be held up in court for years.

 

No one I've talked to is as concerned about the rate increases that have been approved for the construction of wind farms in Kenedy County, but are adamant about not having a coal fired plant on the bay.

 

All of this is going on only about 50 miles south of the Eagle Ford.

 

GLTA

Permalink Reply by P.G. on December 29, 2010 at 9:26

I used to fish in both the intake and discharge canals of this power plant in Florida. That was before terrorism happened.

On occasion, I'd have to get out of the way of those huge ocean going coal barges. The discharge canal water temperature was a constant 85f in the winter time. Lots of manatees and fish would go there to beat the cold water of the gulf.

They had both coal and nuclear power generation. I don't know what all the fuss would be in Texas as I never heard any complaints about either down in Florida. Folks would sometimes joke about catching glow-in-the-dark fish though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_River_Energy_Complex
Permalink Reply by benny688 on December 30, 2010 at 16:19

The injunction against Las Brisas was issued over air quality and the amount of particulate matter that would be released into the air.

 

Sometimes in South Texas the water can get so hot on its own that they have red tides with big fish kills.  The bacteria from the red tides also has the strange effect of giving puppy dogs a fatal type of pneumonia.

 

Floundering on Nueces Bay is a very popular cool weather activity there. 

 

GLTA

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Top Content 

1 Looking Back At The Haynesville Shale - A Retrospective

Looking Back At The Haynesville Shale - A Retrospective
2 Pending Public Oil and Gas Hearings

Pending Public Oil and Gas Hearings
3 Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play

Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play
4 Aethon looks for Buyers of its Haynesville Assets

Aethon looks for Buyers of its Haynesville Assets
5 Notice Emails Are Back! Please review how they work.

Notice Emails Are Back! Please review how they work.
6 Comstock October Presentation

Comstock October Presentation
7 Haynesville Has 12.5 Years of Sub-$3 NatGas Inventory - Enverus

Haynesville Has 12.5 Years of Sub-$3 NatGas Inventory - Enverus

Blog Posts

The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling

Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…

Continue

Posted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service