Capitol Power Plant to stop use of coal

[babylonsister]

Capitol Power Plant to stop use of coal
By Jordy Yager
Posted: 05/01/09 06:10 PM


House and Senate leadership formally announced on Friday that coal would no longer be used to heat and cool the Capitol and surrounding office buildings – for the most part.

Coal will continue to be used in three different scenarios as “emergency backup,” according to the leaders.

“For years, the Capitol Power Plant has been the largest source of carbon emissions on the Capitol Complex,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in a statement.

“The Architect’s switch to cleaner burning natural gas shows that the House and Senate are leading by example in reducing our emissions. I look forward to working with the Architect’s office to achieve even greater energy savings and efficiency through our greening programs.”

Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) previously announced they intended to stop the plant’s use of coal.

more...

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/capitol-power-plant-to-stop-use-of-coal-2009-05-01.html

[NNadir]

1. Dangerous natural gas is not a clean fuel. It never has been; it never will be.

Unremarked by the pro-gas anti-nukes on this website - most of whom by the Schroeder/Lovins "gas, gas, gas, gas" scam, there is no permanent repository for dangerous natural gas waste, which is routinely dumped indiscriminately in Earth's atomosphere where it is responsible for the wholesale destruction of ecosystems, water supplies and human lives.

Dangerous natural gas accidents have killed large numbers of people and we don't need a fucking retarded epidemiologist like Steven Wing to make stuff up to attempt to "prove" this point.

Then again, in the anti-nuke community, they couldn't care less about dangerous fossil fuel accidents, even though they occur regularly.

Dangerous natural gas mines destroy ground water systems around the world, and the dangerous natural gas industry is dominated by Middle Eastern governments with terrorist connections.

The idea that dangerous natural gas is a good idea is ridiculous on its face and Congress should stop pretending that this is "doing something."

It's of marginal advantage.

[babylonsister]

2. Tough. It's a start. What should they use, oho wise one? That's

viable and affordable?

[bananas]

3. He wants them to burn coal for twenty years

while a nuclear power plant is constructed.
Then, after the nuclear plant is cancelled because of cost overruns,
he'll want them to burn coal for another twenty years,
while they try to build a Morton Salt Breeder Reactor.
And when that one is cancelled because of cost overruns...

[madokie]

4. I wonder what part the nuclear power industry played

in the decision the coalie boys made in using a direct burn instead of using a gasifier in the converting of coal to energy. By using a gasifier the amount of co2 produced is reduced even if no co2 capture happens. If we were to convert our present direct burn plants with gasifiers it would help to buy us some time. All the infrastructure is already there.

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/gasification/index.html


Coal gasification offers one of the most versatile and clean ways to convert coal into electricity, hydrogen, and other valuable energy products.

Coal gasification electric power plants are now operating commercially in the United States and in other nations, and many experts predict that coal gasification will be at the heart of future generations of clean coal technology plants.

Rather than burning coal directly, gasification (a thermo-chemical process) breaks down coal - or virtually any carbon-based feedstock - into its basic chemical constituents. In a modern gasifier, coal is typically exposed to steam and carefully controlled amounts of air or oxygen under high temperatures and pressures. Under these conditions, molecules in coal break apart, initiating chemical reactions that typically produce a mixture of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and other gaseous compounds.

Gasification, in fact, may be one of the most flexible technologies to produce clean-burning hydrogen for tomorrow's automobiles and power-generating fuel cells. Hydrogen and other coal gases can also be used to fuel power-generating turbines, or as the chemical "building blocks" for a wide range of commercial products. <> Read more about hydrogen production.>

The Energy Department's Office of Fossil Energy is working on coal gasifier advances that enhance efficiency, environmental performance, and reliability as well as expand the gasifier's flexibility to process a variety of coals and other feedstocks (including biomass and municipal/industrial wastes).

Environmental Benefits
The environmental benefits of gasification stem from the capability to achieve extremely low SOx, NOx and particulate emissions from burning coal-derived gases. Sulfur in coal, for example, is converted to hydrogen sulfide and can be captured by processes presently used in the chemical industry. In some methods, the sulfur can be extracted in either a liquid or solid form that can be sold commercially. In an Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (IGCC) plant, the syngas produced is virtually free of fuel-bound nitrogen. NOx from the gas turbine is limited to thermal NOx. Diluting the syngas allows for NOx emissions as low as 15 parts per million. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) can be used to reach levels comparable to firing with natural gas if required to meet more stringent emission levels. Other advanced emission control processes are being developed that could reduce NOx from hydrogen fired turbines to as low as 2 parts per million.

The Office of Fossil Energy is also exploring advanced syngas cleaning and conditioning processes that are even more effective in eliminating emissions from coal gasifiers. Multi-contaminant control processes are being developed that reduce pollutants to parts-per-billion levels and will be effective in cleaning mercury and other trace metals in addition to other impurities.

Coal gasification may offer a further environmental advantage in addressing concerns over the atmospheric buildup of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. If oxygen is used in a coal gasifier instead of air, carbon dioxide is emitted as a concentrated gas stream in syngas at high pressure. In this form, it can be captured and sequestered more easily and at lower costs. By contrast, when coal burns or is reacted in air, 79 percent of which is nitrogen, the resulting carbon dioxide is diluted and more costly to separate.

Efficiency Benefits
Efficiency gains are another benefit of coal gasification. In a typical coal combustion-based power plant, heat from burning coal is used to boil water, making steam that drives a steam turbine-generator. In some coal combustion-based power plants, only a third of the energy value of coal is actually converted into electricity.

A coal gasification power plant, however, typically gets dual duty from the gases it produces. First, the coal gases, cleaned of impurities, are fired in a gas turbine - much like natural gas - to generate one source of electricity. The hot exhaust of the gas turbine, and some of the heat generated in the gasification process, are then used to generate steam for use in a steam turbine-generator. This dual source of electric power, called a "combined cycle," is much more efficient in converting coal's energy into usable electricity. The fuel efficiency of a coal gasification power plant in this type of combined cycle can potentially be boosted to 50 percent or more.

Future concepts that incorporate a fuel cell or a fuel cell-gas turbine hybrid could achieve efficiencies nearly twice today's typical coal combustion plants. If any of the remaining heat can be channeled into process steam or heat, perhaps for nearby factories or district heating plants, the overall fuel use efficiency of future gasification plants could reach 70 to 80 percent.

Higher efficiencies translate into more economical electric power and potential savings for ratepayers. A more efficient plant also uses less fuel to generate power, meaning that less carbon dioxide is produced. In fact, coal gasification power processes under development by the Energy Department could cut the formation of carbon dioxide by 40 percent or more, per unit of output, compared to today's conventional coal-burning plant.

The capability to produce electricity, hydrogen, chemicals, or various combinations while eliminating nearly all air pollutants and potentially greenhouse gas emissions makes coal gasification one of the most promising technologies for energy plants of the future.


ADD: heres another link: http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/gasification/howgasificationworks.html

(snip)
Higher efficiencies mean that less fuel is used to generate the rated power, resulting in better economics (which can mean lower costs to ratepayers) and the formation of fewer greenhouse gases (a 60%-efficient gasification power plant can cut the formation of carbon dioxide by 40% compared to a typical coal combustion plant).

[eppur_se_muova]

5. Maybe they should burn all those Sternly Worded Letters.

That way taxpayers would get *some* good out of them.

[Iwanicki]

6. NA

Hello, That's a nice move

Jordy Yager