2 replies to this topic

[Shortpoet-GTD]

Coal is still abundant and cheap. The coal industry lobbies against cleaning scrubbers
as too expensive.
But scrubbers may not be needed.

A new reactor could capture up to 99% of the pollutant, carbon dioxide.

The DOE is certainly spending enough to find the answers; $3.4 billion for carbon capture
and storage.
Test reactors are planned for Alabama at a cost of $14 million.


But they still have a long way to go and there are other environmental factors
to consider-
we'd still have the issues of coal mining;
cave-ins-

http://www.usmra.com/accidents.htm

black lung disease
http://www.pbs.org/n...coal_07-09.html

holding ponds for coal ash spilling into waterways, (or wiping out entire towns)
Tennessee coal ash spill

and mountaintop removal.
https://encrypted-tb...HEe99VCHL9Cw50Q

Article

Additional info-
http://www.netl.doe....industrial.html

[still learning]

Shortpoet-GTD, on 25 May 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

Coal is still abundant and cheap....... Article......

An Interesting article you've  linked to....Made me look for more detail.  Some here http://www.midwesten...ad-to-adoption/   and here  http://researchnews..../looping203.htm   A different way of carbon capture.  The usual ways mentioned are either to scrub/separate the CO2 from the bulk of the exhaust gas (mostly nitrogen) of an otherwise ordinary coal-fired boiler, or to burn the coal in oxygen instead of air so that the exhaust is mostly CO2 (no nitrogen) and can be entirely captured.    The next step, building that 250 kw (thermal) setup will still be a long way from what an electric utility would be interested in, but I hope it works out.  Gotta hope some of the difficulties that I can imagine aren't show-stoppers.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

"To dream the impossible dream"..................back  to 350. Wouldn't that be great?