Marina Schwarz + 1,576 May 22, 2019 https://www.pv-tech.org/news/affordable-solar-plus-storage-hard-to-beat-for-coal And this: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-05-21/why-california-nixed-a-natural-gas-power-plant-in-favor-of-batteries In other words, you only had to add storage and it took you long enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169 RJ May 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Marina Schwarz said: https://www.pv-tech.org/news/affordable-solar-plus-storage-hard-to-beat-for-coal And this: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-05-21/why-california-nixed-a-natural-gas-power-plant-in-favor-of-batteries In other words, you only had to add storage and it took you long enough. it would be interesting to see a development curve for the effictiveness of coal and compare it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marina Schwarz + 1,576 May 22, 2019 Can coal be improved in terms of effectiveness/efficiency? It burns and that's all it does. Or maybe the furnaces could be upgraded or something... Not sure anyone would be willing to waste time or money on this but I may be wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169 RJ May 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Marina Schwarz said: Can coal be improved in terms of effectiveness/efficiency? It burns and that's all it does. Or maybe the furnaces could be upgraded or something... Not sure anyone would be willing to waste time or money on this but I may be wrong. I am sure some of the engineering gurus on the forum can answer this better than I, but basically my understanding is that a coal fired power-plant can designed to use the energy more efficiently - i.e. a coal-fired powerplant built in 2001 may use 60 % of the energy in the coal and one built in 1975 may only use 45% of the energy in the coal... The numbers are guess work on my part, but I think you get where I am going with this...   1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marina Schwarz + 1,576 May 22, 2019 I see. That's interesting. So coal's not dead, then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169 RJ May 22, 2019 34 minutes ago, Marina Schwarz said: I see. That's interesting. So coal's not dead, then. I don't know. I think the more interesting question is where solar and others are on comparative development curve. Eye of the beholder I guess. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marina Schwarz + 1,576 May 22, 2019 Yes, that would be interesting to see. It certainly is a major accomplishment that solar has become comparable to coal on costs. Not universally but still. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites