On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
<kev.holohan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>
>"The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch

Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
Guardian to find out :-)

On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
> <kev.holohan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>>
>> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
>
> Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
> Guardian to find out :-)

Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.

On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 20:42:52 UTC, newshound wrote:
> > Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
> > Guardian to find out :-)
> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.

Imported from America, ferried over by sumpo-oil fueled cargo ships.

newshound wrote:

> Scott wrote:
>
>> Which coal fired stations remain operational?  I am not paying the
>> Guardian to find out :-)
>
> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.

I think its final coal-only unit stopped burning coal last year, it was kept in
some sort of reserve coal capacity for a short while and is now getting
converted to woodchip, like the other units, and woodchip's "eco" credentials
have been called out as "not so eco" now ...

On 23/03/2022 20:42, newshound wrote:
> On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
>> <kev.holohan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being
>>> warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas
>>> prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>>>
>>> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions
>>> cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours
>>> of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price
>>> of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
>>>
>>
>> Which coal fired stations remain operational?  I am not paying the
>> Guardian to find out :-)
>
> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.

No, there are a couple of others still left as well

--
Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!

On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 13:18:16 UTC, Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
> <kev.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
> >
> >"The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
> >
> >https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
> Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
> Guardian to find out :-)

West Burton still has two of the original four sets running. It was West Burton fly ash that was used as pozzolan in the Thames flood barrier. Shipped down by the trainload.

On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 20:42:52 UTC, newshound wrote:
> On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
> > <kev.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
> >>
> >> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
> >>
> >> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
> >
> > Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
> > Guardian to find out :-)
> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.
Drax only burns wood chip now. The coal mills taken out of use.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 00:56:12 -0700 (PDT), John J
<johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 20:42:52 UTC, newshound wrote:
>> On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
>> > On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
>> > <kev.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>> >>
>> >> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>> >>
>> >> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
>> >
>> > Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
>> > Guardian to find out :-)
>> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.
>Drax only burns wood chip now. The coal mills taken out of use.

Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
minute?

* https://www.drax.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Drax_AR2020.pdf

--
Chris

On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
> minute

Obviously you have to plant one new tree whip per minute.

--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 00:56:12 -0700 (PDT), John J
> <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 20:42:52 UTC, newshound wrote:
>>> On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
>>>> <kev.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>>>>>
>>>>> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
>>>>
>>>> Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
>>>> Guardian to find out :-)
>>> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.
>> Drax only burns wood chip now. The coal mills taken out of use.
>
> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
> minute?
>
> * https://www.drax.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Drax_AR2020.pdf

One per minute or 525,000 per year (assuming no failures). OK that won't
absorb it straight away, but once what is planted now is mature, the
mature trees that you were cutting down would be balanced by the ones
reaching maturity each year.

Of course it will be more to allow for failures and for losses in
cutting, drying and shipping the wood.

A proportion of the wood chippings will be from waste wood from trees
grown for timber though.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:26:17 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
>> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
>> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
>> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
>> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
>> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
>> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
>> minute
>
>Obviously you have to plant one new tree whip per minute.

One per minute, obviously and as you say, but those trees would have
to be mature when they were felled. You'd have to be planting them at
that rate for many years before they reached maturity, probably for
about fifty years or so. So you'd have had to plant something over 26
billion trees before you could reach an equilibrium (50x525,000). 26
billion trees is some eight times the number we already have, and that
would be just to feed Drax 'carbon-neutrally', let alone all the other
sources of CO2 that trees are supposed to be going to compensate for.

There was a discussion about it here a few years ago, giving a much
more detailed calculation than I've done here, but I can't find it
now.

--
Chris

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 16:26:24 +0000, Steve Walker
<steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:

>On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 00:56:12 -0700 (PDT), John J
>> <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 23 March 2022 at 20:42:52 UTC, newshound wrote:
>>>> On 23/03/2022 13:18, Scott wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Kevin Holohan
>>>>> <kev.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks like some of the remaining coal fired power stations are being warmed up to support the grid in response to little wind, high gas prices and a fire shutting down one of the French interconnects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The market price at one of the UK’s main electricity auctions cleared at a record price of £2,500 per megawatt-hour for the hours of peak demand on Wednesday, compared with a typical baseload price of about £40/MWh throughout 2019 and 2020."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/15/fire-shuts-one-of-uk-most-important-power-cables-in-midst-of-supply-crunch
>>>>>
>>>>> Which coal fired stations remain operational? I am not paying the
>>>>> Guardian to find out :-)
>>>> Drax, I think, although it can also burn wood-chip.
>>> Drax only burns wood chip now. The coal mills taken out of use.
>>
>> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
>> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
>> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
>> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
>> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
>> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
>> minute?
>>
>> * https://www.drax.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Drax_AR2020.pdf
>
>One per minute or 525,000 per year (assuming no failures). OK that won't
>absorb it straight away, but once what is planted now is mature, the
>mature trees that you were cutting down would be balanced by the ones
>reaching maturity each year.
>
>Of course it will be more to allow for failures and for losses in
>cutting, drying and shipping the wood.
>
>A proportion of the wood chippings will be from waste wood from trees
>grown for timber though.

See my reply to TNP.

--
Chris

On 24/03/2022 19:02, Chris Hogg wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:26:17 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
>>> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
>>> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
>>> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
>>> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
>>> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
>>> minute
>>
>> Obviously you have to plant one new tree whip per minute.
>
> One per minute, obviously and as you say, but those trees would have
> to be mature when they were felled. You'd have to be planting them at
> that rate for many years before they reached maturity, probably for
> about fifty years or so. So you'd have had to plant something over 26
> billion trees before you could reach an equilibrium (50x525,000). 26
> billion trees is some eight times the number we already have, and that
> would be just to feed Drax 'carbon-neutrally', let alone all the other
> sources of CO2 that trees are supposed to be going to compensate for.
>
Planting trees for firewood you wouldn't let them grow that long. About
20 years probably.
But agreed, biomass is as shit way to do renewable energy except that it
does give you a stored energy product.

Your maths is totally out. 20x365x24x3600 = 10,512,000 - a shade over
ten million trees, to feed Drax.

David Mackay reckoned that biomass was about 0.1W/sq m IIRC. Or it
might have been 1W

so for Drax, we have 4GW. at .1W/sq m, 10^5W /sq km. = 100kW/sq km. so
10 sq km per MW or 40,000 sq km to generate 4GW.

An area the size of most of Scotland.

HOWEVER there are places on this earth where nothing BUT scrubby trees
grow - Think Canada.

> There was a discussion about it here a few years ago, giving a much
> more detailed calculation than I've done here, but I can't find it
> now.
>
Try doing it again.

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:36:54 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 24/03/2022 19:02, Chris Hogg wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:26:17 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>>> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
>>>> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
>>>> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
>>>> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
>>>> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
>>>> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
>>>> minute
>>>
>>> Obviously you have to plant one new tree whip per minute.
>>
>> One per minute, obviously and as you say, but those trees would have
>> to be mature when they were felled. You'd have to be planting them at
>> that rate for many years before they reached maturity, probably for
>> about fifty years or so. So you'd have had to plant something over 26
>> billion trees before you could reach an equilibrium (50x525,000). 26
>> billion trees is some eight times the number we already have, and that
>> would be just to feed Drax 'carbon-neutrally', let alone all the other
>> sources of CO2 that trees are supposed to be going to compensate for.
>>
>Planting trees for firewood you wouldn't let them grow that long. About
>20 years probably.

But would a 20-year-old tree weigh 25 tons? I was speculating and I
really don't know, and my suggestion was primarily based on weight of
green wood consumed (before converting to partially as dried pellets)
of 25 tons/minute, rather than tree age. I volunteer with a woodland
conservation group, and the trees planted 20 years ago are nowhere
near 25 tons, more like 5 at a guess, if that. But different trees
grow at different rates, depending on species and local environment.

>But agreed, biomass is as shit way to do renewable energy except that it
>does give you a stored energy product.

+1

>Your maths is totally out.

<chuckle>

>20x365x24x3600 = 10,512,000 - a shade over
>ten million trees, to feed Drax.
>
My maths is not as bad as yours! :-) 20x365x24x3600 = 630,720,000.
You've got an extra 60 in there (it's one per minute, not on per
second), and if you use 50 years rather than 20, you get my figure.

>David Mackay reckoned that biomass was about 0.1W/sq m IIRC. Or it
>might have been 1W

He settles on a figure of about 0.5W/sq.m (p.48)
>
>so for Drax, we have 4GW. at .1W/sq m, 10^5W /sq km. = 100kW/sq km. so
>10 sq km per MW or 40,000 sq km to generate 4GW.

Using Mackay's value of 0.5W/sq.m gives 8,000 sq.km
>
>An area the size of most of Scotland.

Not quite Scotland, but still pretty big! And that's just for Drax. By
the time they've converted all the vehicles to electric, and domestic
heating, and industry, there'll be no room for solar panels, wind
generators, growing food, or anything, really!
>
>HOWEVER there are places on this earth where nothing BUT scrubby trees
>grow - Think Canada.

Or...er...Siberia, where all the Russian oil and gas comes from. In
view of recent events, perhaps not!
>
>> There was a discussion about it here a few years ago, giving a much
>> more detailed calculation than I've done here, but I can't find it
>> now.
>>
>Try doing it again.

--
Chris

Chris Hogg wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> An area the size of most of Scotland.
>
> Not quite Scotland, but still pretty big! And that's just for Drax. By
> the time they've converted all the vehicles to electric, and domestic
> heating, and industry, there'll be no room for solar panels, wind
> generators, growing food, or anything, really!

Sounds like the opposite of Easter Island

On 25 Mar 2022 at 00:36:54 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

> Your maths is totally out. 20x365x24x3600 = 10,512,000 - a shade over
> ten million trees, to feed Drax.

That should be 20 x 365 x 24 x 60 (one / min) but the 10.5 million is correct.

--
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place." - Douglas Adams

On 25/03/2022 00:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> HOWEVER there are places on this earth where nothing BUT scrubby trees
> grow - Think Canada.
>

Don't be silly. Too cold. Southern US states are warm and humid, where
trees grow faster.

On 25 Mar 2022 16:35:20 GMT, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net>
wrote:

>On 25 Mar 2022 at 00:36:54 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> Your maths is totally out. 20x365x24x3600 = 10,512,000 - a shade over
>> ten million trees, to feed Drax.
>
>That should be 20 x 365 x 24 x 60 (one / min) but the 10.5 million is correct.

So more of a typo than a miscalculation.

Something similar with my claim that 50x525,000 is about 26 billion.
Should have been 'about 26 million' of course.

--
Chris

On Friday, 25 March 2022 at 00:36:59 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 19:02, Chris Hogg wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:26:17 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
> > <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On 24/03/2022 08:24, Chris Hogg wrote:
> >>> Drax burns seven million tonnes of wood pellets per annum*. That's
> >>> about 13.3 tonnes per minute, or bearing in mind that the pellets are
> >>> partially dried, about 25 tonnes of green wood equivalent, per minute,
> >>> or about one fully-grown tree per minute, maybe more. Puts all this
> >>> tree planting to absorb CO2 into perspective. How many tree whips do
> >>> you have to plant to get the equivalent new growth of 25 tonnes per
> >>> minute
> >>
> >> Obviously you have to plant one new tree whip per minute.
> >
> > One per minute, obviously and as you say, but those trees would have
> > to be mature when they were felled. You'd have to be planting them at
> > that rate for many years before they reached maturity, probably for
> > about fifty years or so. So you'd have had to plant something over 26
> > billion trees before you could reach an equilibrium (50x525,000). 26
> > billion trees is some eight times the number we already have, and that
> > would be just to feed Drax 'carbon-neutrally', let alone all the other
> > sources of CO2 that trees are supposed to be going to compensate for.
> >
> Planting trees for firewood you wouldn't let them grow that long. About
> 20 years probably.
> But agreed, biomass is as shit way to do renewable energy except that it
> does give you a stored energy product.
>
> Your maths is totally out. 20x365x24x3600 = 10,512,000 - a shade over
> ten million trees, to feed Drax.
>
> David Mackay reckoned that biomass was about 0.1W/sq m IIRC. Or it
> might have been 1W
>
> so for Drax, we have 4GW. at .1W/sq m, 10^5W /sq km. = 100kW/sq km. so
> 10 sq km per MW or 40,000 sq km to generate 4GW.
>
> An area the size of most of Scotland.
>
> HOWEVER there are places on this earth where nothing BUT scrubby trees
> grow - Think Canada.
>
> > There was a discussion about it here a few years ago, giving a much
> > more detailed calculation than I've done here, but I can't find it
> > now.
> >
> Try doing it again.
>
>
> --
> "Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
> community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
> "What kind of person is not interested in those things?"
>
> "Jeremy Corbyn?"
Spending some time near Selby yesterday i noticed in the morning two of the cooling towers at Drax were issuing vapour then later on around tea time another two started wishing vapour. Presumably another generating unit was being brought up for the evening/overnight load. Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass. 🤔

John J wrote:

> Spending some time near Selby yesterday i noticed in the morning two of the
> cooling towers at Drax were issuing vapour then later on around tea time
> another two started wishing vapour. Presumably another generating unit was
> being brought up for the evening/overnight load. Being quite prominent on my
> horizon I'd be interested if the output of Drax was available as a live feed
> not just lumped in with biomass. 🤔
I don't think they show their own output separated from other biomass outputs,
but have a poke around Drax Electric Insights

<https://electricinsights.co.uk>

On 28/03/2022 15:38, John J wrote:
> Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass.
TBH its about all the biomass that shows up there - there is less than
100MW of 'non Drax'

--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On Monday, 28 March 2022 at 16:59:21 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 28/03/2022 15:38, John J wrote:
> > Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass.
> TBH its about all the biomass that shows up there - there is less than
> 100MW of 'non Drax'

Any idea of the differncies bewteen the 'brown" coal the germans are burning and the standard 'black' stuff we used
I've heard it's less energy dense (and they have lots of it) but how does word out pollution and emiisions wise
in the modern burners, probably difficult to work out and even then adjusted with some tree planting payback scam.

On 29/03/2022 13:58, whisky-dave wrote:
> On Monday, 28 March 2022 at 16:59:21 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 28/03/2022 15:38, John J wrote:
>>> Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass.
>> TBH its about all the biomass that shows up there - there is less than
>> 100MW of 'non Drax'
>
> Any idea of the differncies bewteen the 'brown" coal the germans are burning and the standard 'black' stuff we used
> I've heard it's less energy dense (and they have lots of it) but how does word out pollution and emiisions wise
> in the modern burners, probably difficult to work out and even then adjusted with some tree planting payback scam.
>
IIRC it is higher in sulphur, but perhaps they have FGD everywhere?

On 29/03/2022 14:41, newshound wrote:
> On 29/03/2022 13:58, whisky-dave wrote:
>> On Monday, 28 March 2022 at 16:59:21 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher
>> wrote:
>>> On 28/03/2022 15:38, John J wrote:
>>>> Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output
>>>> of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass.
>>> TBH its about all the biomass that shows up there - there is less than
>>> 100MW of 'non Drax'
>>
>> Any idea of the differncies bewteen the 'brown" coal the germans are
>> burning and the standard 'black' stuff we used
>> I've heard it's less energy dense (and they have lots of it) but how
>> does word out pollution and emiisions wise
>> in the modern burners, probably difficult to work out and even then
>> adjusted with some tree planting payback scam.
>>
> IIRC it is higher in sulphur, but perhaps they have FGD everywhere?

"Types of coal

Coal is classified into four main types, or ranks: anthracite,
bituminous, subbituminous, and lignite. The ranking depends on the types
and amounts of carbon the coal contains and on the amount of heat energy
the coal can produce. The rank of a coal deposit is determined by the
amount of pressure and heat that acted on the plants over time.

Anthracite contains 86%–97% carbon and generally has the highest heating
value of all ranks of coal. Anthracite accounted for less than 1% of the
coal mined in the United States in 2020. All of the anthracite mines in
the United States are in northeastern Pennsylvania. In the United
States, anthracite is mainly used by the metals industry.

Bituminous coal contains 45%–86% carbon. Bituminous coal in the United
States is between 100 million and 300 million years old. Bituminous coal
is the most abundant rank of coal found in the United States, and it
accounted for about 44% of total U.S. coal production in 2020.
Bituminous coal is used to generate electricity and is an important fuel
and raw material for making coking coal or use in the iron and steel
industry. Bituminous coal was produced in at least 18 states in 2020,
but five states accounted for about 74% of total bituminous production:
West Virginia (28%), Pennsylvania (14%), Illinois (13%), Kentucky (10%),
and Indiana (8%).

Subbituminous coal typically contains 35%–45% carbon, and it has a lower
heating value than bituminous coal. Most subbituminous coal in the
United States is at least 100 million years old. About 46% of total U.S.
coal production in 2020 was subbituminous and about 88% was produced in
Wyoming and 8% in Montana. The remainder was produced in Alaska,
Colorado, and New Mexico.

Lignite contains 25%–35% carbon and has the lowest energy content of all
coal ranks. Lignite coal deposits tend to be relatively young and were
not subjected to extreme heat or pressure. Lignite is crumbly and has
high moisture content, which contributes to its low heating value.
Lignite accounted for 9% of total U.S. coal production in 2020. About
54% was mined in North Dakota and about 39% was mined in Texas. The
other 7% was produced in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Montana. Lignite is
mostly used to generate electricity. A facility in North Dakota also
converts lignite to synthetic natural gas that is sent in natural gas
pipelines to consumers in the eastern United States."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AFAIUI lignite is full of water and unreformed plant material and cyclic
hydrocarbons as well as pure carbon.

--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason
they are poor.

Peter Thompson

On 29/03/2022 16:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 29/03/2022 14:41, newshound wrote:
>> On 29/03/2022 13:58, whisky-dave wrote:
>>> On Monday, 28 March 2022 at 16:59:21 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 28/03/2022 15:38, John J wrote:
>>>>> Being quite prominent on my horizon I'd be interested if the output
>>>>> of Drax was available as a live feed not just lumped in with biomass.
>>>> TBH its about all the biomass that shows up there - there is less than
>>>> 100MW of 'non Drax'
>>>
>>> Any idea of the differncies bewteen the 'brown" coal the germans are
>>> burning and the standard 'black' stuff we used
>>> I've heard it's less energy dense (and they have lots of it) but how
>>> does word out pollution and emiisions wise
>>> in the modern burners, probably difficult to work out and even then
>>> adjusted with some tree planting payback scam.
>>>
>> IIRC it is higher in sulphur, but perhaps they have FGD everywhere?
>
> "Types of coal
>
> Coal is classified into four main types, or ranks: anthracite,
> bituminous, subbituminous, and lignite. The ranking depends on the types
> and amounts of carbon the coal contains and on the amount of heat energy
> the coal can produce. The rank of a coal deposit is determined by the
> amount of pressure and heat that acted on the plants over time.
>
> Anthracite contains 86%–97% carbon and generally has the highest heating
> value of all ranks of coal. Anthracite accounted for less than 1% of the
> coal mined in the United States in 2020. All of the anthracite mines in
> the United States are in northeastern Pennsylvania. In the United
> States, anthracite is mainly used by the metals industry.
>
> Bituminous coal contains 45%–86% carbon. Bituminous coal in the United
> States is between 100 million and 300 million years old. Bituminous coal
> is the most abundant rank of coal found in the United States, and it
> accounted for about 44% of total U.S. coal production in 2020.
> Bituminous coal is used to generate electricity and is an important fuel
> and raw material for making coking coal or use in the iron and steel
> industry. Bituminous coal was produced in at least 18 states in 2020,
> but five states accounted for about 74% of total bituminous production:
> West Virginia (28%), Pennsylvania (14%), Illinois (13%), Kentucky (10%),
> and Indiana (8%).
>
> Subbituminous coal typically contains 35%–45% carbon, and it has a lower
> heating value than bituminous coal. Most subbituminous coal in the
> United States is at least 100 million years old. About 46% of total U.S.
> coal production in 2020 was subbituminous and about 88% was produced in
> Wyoming and 8% in Montana. The remainder was produced in Alaska,
> Colorado, and New Mexico.
>
> Lignite contains 25%–35% carbon and has the lowest energy content of all
> coal ranks. Lignite coal deposits tend to be relatively young and were
> not subjected to extreme heat or pressure. Lignite is crumbly and has
> high moisture content, which contributes to its low heating value.
> Lignite accounted for 9% of total U.S. coal production in 2020. About
> 54% was mined in North Dakota and about 39% was mined in Texas. The
> other 7% was produced in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Montana. Lignite is
> mostly used to generate electricity. A facility in North Dakota also
> converts lignite to synthetic natural gas that is sent in natural gas
> pipelines to consumers in the eastern United States."
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> AFAIUI lignite is full of water and unreformed plant material and cyclic
> hydrocarbons as well as pure carbon.
>
>
>
https://www.env-health.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/HEAL-Lignite-Briefing-en_web.pdf

Looks like I was right about the sulphur. OTOH Germany might be ahead of
the game in FGD.