A detailed analysis of powerplants in China by MIT researchers debunks
the widespread notion that outmoded energy technology or the utter
absence of government regulation is to blame for that country’s
notorious air-pollution problems. The real issue, the study found,
involves complicated interactions between new market forces, new
commercial pressures and new types of governmental regulation…China’s power sector has been expanding at a rate roughly equivalent to
three to four new coal-fired, 500 megawatt plants coming on line every
week…most of the new plants have been built to very high technical
standards, using some of the most modern technologies available. The
problem has to do with the way that energy infrastructure is being
operated and the types of coals being burned.
The good news is that there is a single lever — coal quality — that could have an enormous impact on Chinese pollution levels. Here is the full story.
Or the bad news here is coal quality. China’s coal reserves are large but poor quality aren’t they? I don’t see them importing coal. Since they are already using the best technology that’s bad news.
I actually work in the energy sector so I’ll be speakigng in my field for once.
Your summary ignores/overlooks this critical sentence early on:
“while at the same time idle expensive-to-operate smokestack scrubbers or other cleanup technologies.”
If you don’t turn on the scrubbers then it doesn’t matter how advanced the technology is and the grade of coal is NOT the most important thing!
Thanks for setting me straight, wongba, I should have read! To better make my point, it’s the economics: the abundance of cheap low quality coal relative to the alternatives. gabe is making a similar point — if the scrubbers are expensive in use, and as a result not used their presence is not relevant.
To inject some politics — Biden’s claim that the Chinese don’t have the technology is wrong.
You know where those guys are going with this line of argument. If it is only a simple matter of turning on the scrubbers (making sure the supply of ash is there etc)adding a few extra percent to the cost of fuel and then China has less SO2 and NOX and mercury pollution….well this is a problem for the environmetal scaremongers who wish to implement a whole global governenence power grid complete with global taxes and millions of rules to micromange our lives to be “sustainable”. So they have to trot out research showing that we need massive new changes to our world, population reduction etc…I can see the headlines “there is not enough good coal left!!”…”6 billion people is beyond the carrying capaicty of the planet we must act now!!”
You’ve misread the article, or your post is not complete.
They are talking about SO2 emissions, not CO2 emissions. Sulphur Dioxide not Carbon Dioxide.
SO2 is bad for the local Chinese, and short term good for the world climate. Our models are well calibrated now, and the Pinatubo eruption gives us a very clear test of the magnitude of the negative aerosol forcing arising from SO2 emissions (in the case of Pinatubo, c. 0.5 degree centigrade worldwide).
CO2 is long term bad for all of us. Burning better coal will help but doesn’t make a huge difference to the picture.
Market prices for electricity in China would help, by reducing consumption. But almost no country charges market prices for electricity, universally. There is usually a degree of subsidisation of large industrial consumers.
I’m the interest rate, I choose the credit crisis, how –I’ve been
celibate for seven years to take control of the classing adjustment
coupling would cause (oh that’s how you won). So consequently
I could probably have the oil price at $170 currently, how -I was
sleeping to providing days with no expectations, and much ridicule.
Instead on July 16th I started exercising.
The directions in this cash economy come down to this:
1)react
2)fill in personality
3)demand cash
The answer to exiting this economy will always be the same -you
will use a program that the Univeristy of Waterloo (9938493) is
aware of. At a certain point of organizing your life with programs
you’ll find everybody is dealing with NEXT BEST THOUGHT.
The program will provide you with directions that are as healthy
and as safe as possible using a process of elimination. A program
will answer the following questions, the best way to remove cash
dependency and determine which option an employee finds most
comfortable.
Since “the news” has made a predictable error my
question is what do you think my “penis position opinion” is,
since with ever opinion the people effecting directions will
check my virile. You’ll find I’m number one.
Their are two groups of people you take opinions with, those that
effect and check your class expectations and those your class place
can be determined by the types of statements you have to say to
be expensive.
The point of checking virile is it determines your personal comfort
best which is the best way to be expensive. Given the point of this
economy is to follow the rule of,
Economic Profit:As much money as fast as possible or as long as
possible.
Such games include:
-my sex life affecting your employment, leading to jail finding you…
-women getting directions about work, approved by a male owner
-female payment due to no financial opinion happening through ridicule
-teenagers fitting into class expectation
-drug dealers controlling classing through tv
-the FBI not having a reason to to anything so coming up with
problems for work such as deturing communism.
-problems for the sake of problems for the reaction to keep fitting
class expectation so economic profit increases.
-Problems so that the reaction is “I don’t understand”
Of course their are exceptions it depends on comfort.
“The intentional error”
People who are in media are a business and they have this
pattern of statement; they realize the error in the statement,
and know all the possible responses.
For example: Lets complain about the new addition to your
household electricity system, the smartmeter. Lets make the
complaint: “I expect a backstop for this product.” or “I expect
this product to improve and both versions worth the investment.”
(If you don’t know “backstop” means replacing a product because
of environmental improvement.)
The company knows the responses, they are accepting criticism in
this way:
The initial consumer ranking game is “comfortable marriage”
1) Who is your assigned male?
2) Explain why he was employable?
3) Does your memory indicate that your finances want to fit in?
4) Are you changing the system?
The purpose of ranking consumers though marriage-ability is the
next obviously important “personal comfort”. Personal comfort
is obviously important to pricing, the economic lingo that is
usually used in it’s place is happiness or satisfaction. I
really want to point out that the consumer ranks those
qualities arbitrarily, it is your personal taste, style,
attitude, your cool, that you fit in the same as years ago.
Personal comfort is exactly why their are twenty times the number
of raw resources that go into a car vs. a computer, yet the pricing
is what the consumer will pay for comfort or satisfaction.
So who’s “personal comfort” changes the company, by setting
consumer trends, changing prices, effecting shares changing the
CEO. The people who at the same time claim approval of a respected
male income.
The fact that the person running the business changes but follows
the same systematic conversation running the company, indicates
their is simply a pattern to running a company, they change the
company like most other consumers, they simply bring their
“marriage comfort” hence “personal comfort” for the consumers
preference, relating to the important consumers preemptively.
So is my only response to media, “dad had a perfect death”.
Comments on this entry are closed.