Coal

Posted on | March 6, 2010 | No Comments

What is the role of coal in the United States?
Due to its relatively low cost and abundance, coal is used to generate about half of the electricity consumed in the United States. Coal is the largest domestically-produced source of energy. Coal use, however, results in higher amounts of carbon dioxide per unit of energy than the use of oil or natural gas.

Coal is an Abundant U.S. Resource with Multiple Uses
The United States is home to the largest recoverable reserves of coal in the world. In fact, we have enough coal to last more than 200 years, based on current consumption levels. Coal is produced in 25 States spread across three coal-producing regions, but approximately 75% of current production originates in just five States: Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Montana.

About 93% of U.S. coal consumption is in the electric power sector, but coal also has certain industrial applications such as cement making and conversion to coke for the smelting of iron ore at blast furnaces to make steel. A small amount of coal is also burned to heat commercial, military, and institutional facilities, and an even smaller amount is used to heat homes.

Over the past 10 years, about 5% of the coal produced in the United States, on average, has been exported. The United States also imports a small amount of coal; some power plants along the Gulf Coast and the Atlantic Coast find it cheaper to import coal by sea from South America than to have it transported from domestic coal mines.

The United States has more than 1,400 coal-fired electricity generating units in operation at more than 600 plants across the country. Together, these power plants generate almost half of the electricity produced in the United States and consume about one billion short tons of coal per year. (Annual coal consumption in the electric power sector is expected to drop below one billion short tons in 2009 for the first time since 2002.)

The share of our electricity generated from coal is expected to decrease by 2035. However, our growing demand for electricity is expected to lead to an increase in the actual amount of coal used, in the absence of new policies to limit or reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Such new policies could significantly change the outlook for coal use.

Coal Is a Relatively Inexpensive Fuel
Although some natural gas plants are more efficient than coal plants at generating electricity, the fuel cost of generating one kilowatthour of electricity from natural gas generally is higher than that of coal. In addition, coal prices have historically been much less volatile than those of natural gas due, in large part, to the existence of long-term coal supply contracts.

Environmental Effects from Using Coal
Coal is plentiful and fairly cheap relative to the cost of other sources of electricity, but its use produces several types of emissions that adversely affect the environment. Coal emits sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and mercury, which have been linked to acid rain, smog, and health issues. Coal also emits carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that has been in the news because of its link to climate change. Coal accounted for 37% of the total U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide released into the Earth’s atmosphere in 2008. Without proper care, coal mining can have a negative impact on ecosystems and water quality, and alter landscapes and scenic views.

Outlook for Future Coal Use
The economics of burning coal may change if the U.S. Congress approves legislation that restricts or otherwise controls carbon dioxide emissions. For example, a cap-and-trade program to regulate carbon dioxide emissions would likely increase the cost of burning coal because of its carbon content, and thereby cause power companies to consider using less carbon-intensive generating technologies such as nuclear, renewables, and natural gas.

Efforts are now underway to develop new technologies to burn coal without emitting as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Scientists are exploring the possibility of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), which seeks to capture up to 90% of the carbon dioxide from coal plants before it is emitted into the atmosphere and then store it below the Earth’s surface. CCS would theoretically address much of coal’s carbon dioxide emissions but faces many economic and technological hurdles.

Take a Nanooze Break

Posted on | March 2, 2010 | Comments Off

A new long-term exhibition at the Walt Disney World Resort® in Lake Buena Vista, Fla., will bring visitors face to face with the nanoworld.

Housed at INNOVENTIONS at Epcot®, the exhibition Take a Nanooze Break features a series of interactive, continually updated displays that allow visitors to manipulate models of molecules, study everyday items at the nanoscale, and interact with scientists and engineers who conduct the latest nano research.

“The experience is immersive and gives guests a number of ways to view a world that is too small to see,” says Carl Batt of Cornell University, the lead researcher for the project. “It also gives guests a view of nanotechnology from real scientists”

Based upon the National Science Foundation (NSF)-supported children’s magazine and Web site Nanooze (http://www.nanooze.org/), the exhibition was developed with further NSF support by collaborators from Cornell University and Tamarack Design of Ithaca, N.Y.

“Nanotechnology will bring multiple, fundamental changes to the way we work to create goods, develop sustainable approaches, advance medicine and improve quality of life.,” says Mike Roco, senior advisor for nanotechnology at NSF. “About $80 billion worth of products incorporated nanoscale components in the United States in 2010, and one can envision mass use of nanotechnology by 2020. The Nanooze exhibition informs and inspires the public about this fast-arriving future society.”

The exhibition opened on Feb. 22, 2010. The work was funded by NSF awards 0725230 and 0937179.

$1.4 Billion in Loan Guarantees to BrightSource Energy

Posted on | March 1, 2010 | 2 Comments

DOE announced on February 22 its conditional commitments for more than $1.37 billion in loan guarantees to BrightSource Energy, Inc. in support of the construction and start-up of three utility-scale concentrated solar power plants (CSP) in the Mojave Desert of southeastern California. The loan guarantee is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and is predicated on BrightSource meeting financial and environmental requirements before closing on the loan. The Bureau of Land Management is leading a federal review of the project with support from DOE. Pending local, state, and federal regulatory approval, the new plants will generate approximately 400 megawatts (MW) of electricity using the company’s proprietary technology. This output would nearly double the existing generation capacity of CSP facilities in the United States.

The three-plant Ivanpah Solar Complex will be located on federally owned land near the Nevada border and will be the world’s largest operational concentrated solar power complex. BrightSource will employ solar power tower technology, which uses thousands of flat mirrors, or “heliostats,” to concentrate the sun’s heat onto a receiver mounted at the top of a tower. Water pumped to the receiver is boiled into steam, which drives a turbine to produce electricity. Solar power towers allow the capture of a greater percentage of solar energy than other solar thermal technologies. The first Ivanpah plant is expected to begin construction in the second half of 2010 and come on line in 2012. Commercial operation for the second plant is slated for mid-2013, with the third plant following later that year. Once operational, the project will supply power to approximately 140,000 California homes. The BrightSource loan guarantee is the sixth conditional commitment for a loan guarantee for clean and renewable energy projects entered into by DOE’s Loan Programs Office. See the DOE press release and DOE’s Loan Guarantee Program Web site.

BrightSource filed a proposal on February 11 to shrink the footprint of the Ivanpah Solar Complex, reducing its environmental impact. The alternative design—submitted to the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the U.S. Department of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as part of Ivanpah’s final permit process—came in response to public comments about the project. The proposed changes would reduce the footprint of the third Ivanpah plant by 23% and trim the overall project by about 12%, while avoiding the area identified by environmental groups as posing the greatest concern. The new plans call for dropping the number of solar towers in the third Ivanpah plant from 5 to 1, which brings the overall total number of towers in the power plant to 3. It also cuts the number of heliostats by about 40,000. If approved, these changes would lower the site’s total gross capacity from 440 MW to 392 MW. See the BrightSource press release (PDF 41 KB). Download Adobe Reader.

Although solar power towers were originally developed by DOE and U.S. industries, the technology has so far been deployed mainly on the plains of Spain, where sunlight seems to fall more often than rain. Last September, Abengoa Solar inaugurated its PS20 solar plant, which is the largest solar power tower plant in the world. Located in Seville, PS20 has more than 1,000 mirrors and is designed to produce 20 MW of power.

The Ivanpah solar project will rely on solar power tower technology, which employs a field of flat mirrors to concentrate the sunlight on a receiver, mounted at the top of a central tower.

Japan Killing Whales

Posted on | February 19, 2010 | Comments Off

The Sea Shepherd ships Steve Irwin and Bob Barker have now had the illegal Japanese whaling processing ship, Nisshin Maru, on the run for two weeks. No whales have has been killed since February 5th.

Three weeks remain in the whaling season, and the Sea Shepherd ships have fuel reserves to continue the chase. The Bob Barker was refitted prior to purchase and has fuel capacity four times what it was designed for.

“I believe the continued running of the Nisshin Maru from East to West and back East again is their attempt to run us out of fuel,” said Captain Paul Watson, “I think they are now surprised that we are still on their tail and continuing to disrupt their illegal whaling operations.” With the Shonan Maru No. 2 disengaged to transport Captain Peter Bethune to Japan, this removes the fourth harpoon boat from the fleet.

“I think we can guarantee now that the Japanese whaling fleet will fail to get their kill quota by 30% to 55% based on past observations of Sea Shepherd disruptions,” said Captain Watson, “They will not be seeing any profits for this season.”

Mr. Masayuki Komatsu, the former Japanese whaling commissioner who once referred to Minke whales as the “cockroaches” of the sea, has warned Japan not to retreat from whaling in Antarctica because it would be handing a decisive victory for the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. “Our minister said that they are going to retreat from Antarctica, Sea Shepherd must be happier,” Komatsu said.

“If the only reason that Japan wishes to continue whaling is because they refuse to be seen backing down from Sea Shepherd than that is truly pathetic and extremely petty on the part of the Japanese government,” said Captain Watson, “What Komatsu is really saying is that we are humiliating Japan by effectively disrupting their illegal poaching activities. If it’s now all about saving face now that they’ve already lost, then they should retreat while they still have half a face left.”

The Sea Shepherd ships will be pursuing the Japanese fleet this weekend during the visit to Australia by Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada.

The Japanese fleet is staying just outside the boundaries of the Australian Antarctic Territorial waters (EEZ) most likely for diplomatic reason during the Okada visit. This move can be viewed as an unofficial recognition of the EEZ. In 2008, the Australian Federal Court ruled that Japan could not kill whales inside the waters of the EEZ. The Japanese whaling fleet is in contempt of that Federal Court order.

Search