Adani Carmichael Approved

 
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
Your claim was that due to the coal in India CO2 emissions would be higher. I am contesting this.

Also and once again, you dont need "better coal" to get higher efficiency. It barely makes a difference. The only real exception is the high moisture coals and even then the difference is not huge.

So 50% ash generates as much CO2/MW as
something missing here?
MMM?

So 50% ash coal generates the same CO2/MW as
RTT_Rules
RP won't let me finish, tried 2 x now.

5% coal

Sponsored advertisement

  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
So 50% ash coal generates the same CO2/MW as 5% ash coal
RTT_Rules


All other things being equal - Yes. We are not burning the ash.

Fuel constituents will generally drive the design, size and cost of the plant. High ash coals are a materials handling problem rather than an efficiency challenge now. Water-Steam Cycle pressure & temperatures and to a much lesser extent unburned carbon (mitigated by plant design) drive the efficiency.

We are now building (and have built) in India Ultra Super Critical Pressure plants, burning Indian fuel that have better CO2/MWh than any Australian plant.

cheers
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
So 50% ash coal generates the same CO2/MW as 5% ash coal


All other things being equal - Yes. We are not burning the ash.

Fuel constituents will generally drive the design, size and cost of the plant. High ash coals are a materials handling problem rather than an efficiency challenge now. Water-Steam Cycle pressure & temperatures and to a much lesser extent unburned carbon (mitigated by plant design) drive the efficiency.

We are now building (and have built) in India Ultra Super Critical Pressure plants, burning Indian fuel that have better CO2/MWh than any Australian plant.

cheers
arctic
Hi thanks

The smelter I worked at in India was burning on average between 50 and 60% ash. The coal was basically grey. So around 10,000t/ day or something like that of dirt transported, heated up and then dumped into a ash pond.

Assuming the same boiler design similar type of coal, but much lower ash, ie USCP and allowing for a ash content of sub 3%, the CO2/MW would be far more favorable when the total lifestyle is factored in. This was my point.

Australia's coal power fleet is a mix of aged and aging with some modern stuff. Only the current RE or bust stupid mentality of our govts is preventing some of the older plants from being closed and replaced as they were planned under former govt ownership. And its not just CO2 that can be improved, NOX and SOX would also be significantly lowered, in the case of SOX, reductions of around 90-95% is possible.

Now its operate to fail, typically around 50 years old, to hell with the environment.

I could be wrong, but I believe the Ducth made the decision to build a new coal plant in recent years to reduce emissions knowing RE was still a generation away from replacing the coal power station.
  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
So 50% ash coal generates the same CO2/MW as 5% ash coal


All other things being equal - Yes. We are not burning the ash.

Fuel constituents will generally drive the design, size and cost of the plant. High ash coals are a materials handling problem rather than an efficiency challenge now. Water-Steam Cycle pressure & temperatures and to a much lesser extent unburned carbon (mitigated by plant design) drive the efficiency.

We are now building (and have built) in India Ultra Super Critical Pressure plants, burning Indian fuel that have better CO2/MWh than any Australian plant.

cheers
Hi thanks

The smelter I worked at in India was burning on average between 50 and 60% ash. The coal was basically grey. So around 10,000t/ day or something like that of dirt transported, heated up and then dumped into a ash pond.

Assuming the same boiler design similar type of coal, but much lower ash, ie USCP and allowing for a ash content of sub 3%, the CO2/MW would be far more favorable when the total lifestyle is factored in. This was my point.
RTT_Rules
Coal has a lifestyle? Smile

And I disagree with this point. Do the calculation. I have in theory and practice, in India and elsewhere. Its not about the fuel, its about the condition and design of the plant. On the other hand if the plant is not maintained or fired on a fuel it was not designed for then damage to efficiency can occur.

These plants run on the rankine cycle. provided the temperature is reached at each end of the cycle, efficiency is undamaged - it cannot be otherwise - its thermodynamics.

Ash that has been heated up and then discarded also has heat extracted from it (as per the flue gas) - most of it is collected after the last heat extraction process (usually an airheater).
  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Tonight, 1454MW demand in renewable rich SA, 1111MW from gas, 24MW from wind. NSW spending energy to recharge their hydro, leaving coal from QLD, NSW and VIC to keep the place running.

VIC generating exactly 0 from wind, QLD 26MW from wing and 118MW from hydro, NSW 384MW from wind and 258MW from hydro (4707MW, 4392MW and 7780MW demands respectively).

Don’t worry, we will be 100% renewable in a few years - so long as we all live without phones, TVs and radios, and switch to candles for lighting and charcoal/wood for cooking.
  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Oh, and because our renewables are cheap, and nuclear is uneconomic, SA energy prices in the last 24 hours have sort of generally hovered about $130/MWh, with several peaks at over $370/MWh, and a peak of $508/MWh.

French power in the same period has been hovering about EUR33/MWh with a peak of EUR42/MWh (and a minimum of EUR17/MWh).

Uneconomic nuclear is substantially cheaper than ‘free’ wind and solar. It’s pretty close to being half the price.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
Tonight, 1454MW demand in renewable rich SA, 1111MW from gas, 24MW from wind. NSW spending energy to recharge their hydro, leaving coal from QLD, NSW and VIC to keep the place running.

VIC generating exactly 0 from wind, QLD 26MW from wing and 118MW from hydro, NSW 384MW from wind and 258MW from hydro (4707MW, 4392MW and 7780MW demands respectively).

Don’t worry, we will be 100% renewable in a few years - so long as we all live without phones, TVs and radios, and switch to candles for lighting and charcoal/wood for cooking.
Aaron
You missed the part of 0MW from wind in SA. I've never seen it that low before and drawing power from the grid.

Yes, if Nuclear can be built for $80-90/MWh it would provide price and reliability stability and certainty advantages that we don't have today and will not have for the foreseeable future.

3000 MW plant on the eastern half of Vic, a
2000 MW in the western half Vic,
3000 MW in south half of NSW
3000 MW in north half of NSW
3000 MW in SW Qld
3000 MW in CQ
SA does all the fuel rod production and disposal.

End of coal

- All built on fixed power unit price contract, no outlay to the taxpayer
- Commission a turbine each year from 2024
- Keep going building each plant based on aging coal retirements until RE can offer a cheaper more reliable alternative
- Remaining gas is peaking gas.
- Each plant is built near the Interstate railway to enable nuclear rods and waste to be moved via rail
- All connected to a backward "L" shaped HV grid from CQ to Adelaide to move power as needed and manage outages.
- Wind, solar, hydro and pumped hydro to provide battery and peaking power and support a variable price market ontop of a fixed price market for nuclear.
  Aaron Minister for Railways

Location: University of Adelaide SA
The only thing I would add about nuclear is that rather than build each plant ‘next to’ an interstate railway, it would be far better to build the plants where they are best suited in terms of geography and grid requirements, building a rail line to the instate lines.

Fueling/defueling/refueling is done extremely infrequently, but bulk electron excitation is done 24 hours a day, everyday.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
You missed the part of 0MW from wind in SA. I've never seen it that low before and drawing power from the grid.
"RTT_Rules"
Get everybody on to a diet of cabbage, baked beans and hard-boiled eggs. That'll fix the wind problem.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, Big J, fzr560, james.au, RTT_Rules

Display from: