yet another coal mine in WV closing

We Really don't need to keep mining coal at a time when it cannot compete on a cost basis. . And we don't need to mine coal to do the research. And deferring mining coal till it can be done at an acceptable level of polution and competitive cost doesn't mean abandoning cosl forever.

 

why should govt encourage sources of energy that cost more than others? Isn't that the argument the right uses to decry projects testing alternative sources?

 

It's certainly true that Obama has insured coal can't compete. I guess sacrificing so many people and communities was just an acceptable cost.

 

They are doing that with wind and solar. I don't understand your point.

Shouldn't the idea be to maximize the available resources?

 

Why the Trumpers want black lung disease to continue is beyond me.

 

I'm sure you don't. But you don't want to subsidize alternatives yet do want to subside coal.

And the reason to "test" alternatives is to find out what their cost bases if produced on a mass scale the same as we use fossil fuels and nuclear. But with coal, we know it's cost.

 

That's the thing. I may be wrong, but I think that if the cost was figured just on how much it costs to produce 1BTU with Xamount of fuel, coal is still very cost competitive. But we know that the Clean Air Act actually saves money when we figure in stuff like health costs, and not just for humans in hospitals, but also costs for food and water. Once those costs are figured in, coal is not really competitive. However, I don't have an issue with fracking. If it really has negative consequences, voters will speak.

If I lived in WVa, I might be for coal. But why Trumpbots think it is an issue that somehow resonates in America is just that the only people it resonates with are intentionally, or accidentally, misinformed.

 

I haven't said I don't want subsidies for alternative sources of energy. Please point to where I have suggested that.

At some point in the future, every energy source is going to be vital. Wars are going to be waged over it. That's just a fact.

The only reason anyone cares about the Middle East is because of it's oil supply.

We shouldn't be walking away from such an abundant natural resource, while exploring better means of meeting the growing demand for it. As the government pushes for an electrified future, how are we going to meet that demand? Just natural gas on top of wind/solar?

IMO, the future will be in some hydrogen based fuel cell system. After all, hydrogen is the most abundant thing in the universe, and about 80% of the Earth is covered in a something that has it in abundance.

Until we get there, I don't believe we should walk away from anything. But I'm repeating myself.

 

FYI Trump is very popular in WV due to his support for coal. So popular your boy dim Senator and former Obama boot licker Joe Manchin is now touting how often he supports Trump.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/21/donald-trump-end-war-coal-rule-replacing-obama-era/

 

The coal issue doesn't have to resonate in America, just WV thereby replacing a dim Senator (Manchin) with a Republican Senator.

 

Manchin is a Senator.

 

then why do Trumpbots defend coal on this board?

 

I have bad news for you. Hillary was right. Those jobs are not coming back.
And yes, someone should help "those" people, but telling them your going to bring their jobs back isn't helping.

 

I don't think anyone should listen to what Hillary says.

As I've been posting, I think it's bad policy to walk away from an abundant energy source.

 

Those jobs are like many others. People will not go down in mines when big machines can just cut the top off of mountains.

 

So you think that deep inside the earth where there is extreme pressure and heat that organic materials are cooked with inorganic materials and new compounds are being formed with carbon molecular chains transforming from just unless goo poo gook goop into new useful creamy soup of petrochemical semi liquid and usefull gases?

Good theory but will we ever proove it?

 

The mass of the earth is not really finite in that there are tons and tons of particals falling from scape as meteors and comet dust and little tiny asteroids.

 

You know sometimes things just get cheaper and sometimes thing get more expensive. It isn't Obama's fault that fracking and horizontal drilling and the discovery of vast reserves of oil sands came along and made coal uncompetitive.

 

What ever happened to Trump's plan to make energy suppliers buy from failing coal fired plants?

 

Help us by showing us proof that he has that plan? I want to study that plan.

 

Check this book out.
June 12, 2012
Format: Kindle EditionVerified Purchase
This is a great book by a great thinker, who allows both scientific and non-scientific readers alike to be inspired to also think for themselves.
Having worked myself on a geological project that had no as yet scientifically acceptable explanation, I contacted Thomas Gold in the 90's (whom I did not know at the time was a Nobel Laureate or author) and we exchanged information about identical features in both of our respective drill campaigns in the center of large terrestrial meteorite impact structures.
It was not until this year, after getting a Kindle, that I found this book and could read it. Having also acquired oil and gas leases over granitic terrain in the past, and having also scratched my head considerably over puzzles such as the ubiquitous graphite in metamorphic intrusive terrains, it was with great interest and sometimes a sense of shared experience that I read this book. Although it was strange reading about an outsider's (non-geologist) reasoning and observational processes about hydrocarbons in rock and the origin of life, Thomas Gold has all the instincts of a good field geologist who uses his brain and scientific education to imagine the history of the earth.
Notwithstanding the advances in understanding and analytical techniques that have happened since this book was published, many of the same questions remain unanswered. His observations remain as important today, and his reasoning is as valid. This is a very entertaining book for any scientist or person interested in the world we inhabit, and inspires us all to further research endeavors.

 

I can't speak for "Trumpbots" but people probably want clean coal to be in the energy mix for lower cost electric bills. There are other reasons such as safety (as compared to nuclear power). Coal is not the fuel of the future -- but neither is the algae energy solution touted by Obama and his minions.

A major reason people reject the liberal attacks on coal is an understanding that the war on coal is based on the cap and trade concept, which was conceived as a means for income redistribution. Most middle class people understand it will be their income redistributed via carbon credits sold to energy companies and passed on as utility bill increases.

 

I like to pass along good books to read. So one must read the great book by Muller.

I bought this book and read Physics for future presidents as well.

 

I believe the plan was released as a draft in June and still is not finalized. At least Trump has a plan whereas Obama's plan was for people in WV to become unemployed. This is why the dims will probably loose Manchin's Senate seat and why Manchin had to vote for Kavanaugh.

 

Politics doesn't matter. Coal is dead.
Just depends on how much taxpayer money you want to spend trying to prop it up.

https://numerical.co.in/numerons/collection/58d048864e976264035a1e35