Germany to Destroy Village in order to build Coal Mine

[EMNofSeattle]

No, I literally mean “inaccessible” unless you remove the entire 3rd largest population center in the state of PA.

I don’t know about that, that seems doubtful.

The mines are flooded,

There is many mines operating or which used to operate in the Pacific Northwest which had to be continuously pumped in order to be worked. Unless there’s something special about coal mines, and maybe there is, that doesn’t apply to silver or copper or various other mines in high precipitation areas, I don’t think this is an engineering problem. It may be a cost problem

on fire, or “robbed” away to the point where sinkholes and collapse would occur if any more was extracted from the ground.

Perhaps, but I doubt this means they are truly “inaccessible”.

 

[BirdinHand]

I don’t know about that, that seems doubtful.

There is many mines operating or which used to operate in the Pacific Northwest which had to be continuously pumped in order to be worked. Unless there’s something special about coal mines, and maybe there is, that doesn’t apply to silver or copper or various other mines in high precipitation areas, I don’t think this is an engineering problem. It may be a cost problem

Perhaps, but I doubt this means they are truly “inaccessible”.

No, it means inaccessible.

It is not silver or copper mining and there are literal towns with tens of thousands of residents on top of the mines.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

No, it means inaccessible.

It is not silver or copper mining and there are literal towns with tens of thousands of residents on top of the mines.

Every coal seam in Pennsylvania has a city on top? I don’t believe that. There’s a lot of empty land in PA, even the famous coal fire town is pretty far from major cities

 

[BirdinHand]

Every coal seam in Pennsylvania has a city on top? I don’t believe that. There’s a lot of empty land in PA, even the famous coal fire town is pretty far from major cities

Yes. The major seams have the literal population centers of that region built in top of them.

Those pesky old folks didn’t plan it out very well…as history has shown.

 

[Volunteer]

No it hasn’t. Is this going to be some fake study by a well funded environmentalist lobby group? Lol such a claim is absurd on its face.

Again, who are these "well funded environmentalist lobby" groups you referenced?

 

[PoS]

I would disagree - considering that my family history is coal miners from the anthracite era of coal.

Not all coal is the same. And anthracite is all but gone.

There are over 5,000 mines abandoned under the “coal region” of PA that are flooded, in fire or abandoned because they cannot be safely mined any longer - making the largest remaining reserves of anthracite coal in the US and world - are largely inaccessible.

Anthracite coal was “king” in the world of coal. More pure, higher carbon ratios, less pollution. At one point, it was the main source of home heating and industrial smelting - and now accounts for less than 1% of either/any coal used worldwide.

The coals remaining are lower quality and higher pollution producing.

The “top tier” of coal is all but gone from US production, and the largest reserves left are largely inaccessible.

You may be right, but what matters for Germany, and every other nation, is expediency. As long as its coal and its cheap, then theyll develop it. If renewables were dependable, they wouldnt be doing this.

 

[BirdinHand]

You may be right, but what matters for Germany, and every other nation, is expediency. As long as its coal and its cheap, then theyll develop it. If renewables were dependable, they wouldnt be doing this.

I struggle to understand why more nuclear isn’t the best choice at this juncture and why Germany in specific has decided to take their nuclear plants offline, especially given the war in Ukraine.

Their decades long mission to be “green” seems to be leading them backwards, instead of towards more sustainable and viable sources of energy.

But, hey, I’m in NJ. We just had the 7th or 8th whale dead wash up on a beach in 6 weeks over here…but it has NOTHING to do with the gigantic windfarm they’re in the process of constructing off the coast. Nothing to see there at all…

 

[Volunteer]

I struggle to understand why more nuclear isn’t the best choice at this juncture and why Germany in specific has decided to take their nuclear plants offline, especially given the war in Ukraine.

In the U.S. nuclear power is alive only on a government subsidized basis. There have been no new private projects begun in decades (except for failed ones in Georgia and South Carolina). Federal taxpayers and southeast U.S. ratepayers are on the hook for billions for failed projects that will never produce squat. No private insurers will touch nuclear power - taxpayers pay the premiums. Not sure if the economics are that different in Germany.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

In the U.S. nuclear power is alive only on a government subsidized basis. There have been no new private projects begun in decades (except for failed ones in Georgia and South Carolina). Federal taxpayers and southeast U.S. ratepayers are on the hook for billions for failed projects that will never produce squat. No private insurers will touch nuclear power - taxpayers pay the premiums. Not sure if the economics are that different in Germany.

This is an example of an industry that should be subsidized however, because it is actually an effective use of taxpayer money.

You already subsidize dozens of nuclear reactors that produce nothing except cruising around the world costing money



So why not subsidize some more baseload power for public use?

 

[longview]

This is an example of an industry that should be subsidized however, because it is actually an effective use of taxpayer money.

You already subsidize dozens of nuclear reactors that produce nothing except cruising around the world costing money

View attachment 67432584

So why not subsidize some more baseload power for public use?

It could be argued that having a stable national power grid is just as statically important as having
an interstate system.

 

[Volunteer]

This is an example of an industry that should be subsidized however, because it is actually an effective use of taxpayer money.

You already subsidize dozens of nuclear reactors that produce nothing except cruising around the world costing money

"...effective use of taxpayer money?" Attempts to arrive at a cost of nuclear power are dead. No-one knows the cost per megawatt hr. You're asking us to subsidize something without known costs?

 

[Volunteer]

It could be argued that having a stable national power grid is just as statically important as having
an interstate system.

There is nothing "stable" about nuclear power's role in the national energy discussion.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

"...effective use of taxpayer money?" Attempts to arrive at a cost of nuclear power are dead. No-one knows the cost per megawatt hr. You're asking us to subsidize something without known costs?

Well it’s very easy to arrive at a cost, what you mean is that it’s impossible to arrive at a cost that dedicated anti-nuclear activists will accept. Usually when leftists hate an industry they’ll make the claim it’s “subsidized” and claim will come with some bizarre number. And their claim will include that we need to talk about how kids in Burkina Faso have eye irritation and that’s 19 trillion dollars and the police department has to exist three towns over from a refinery and that’s a gorillion dollars and a luxury hotel in the Maldives will be flooded 300 years from now because of climate change so tack on 254 billion on the price tag, and they just make up these fake numbers that have nothing to do with cost of actually operating the facilities.

I don’t play this game. your Sierra club nonsense doesn’t mean anything in real life

 

[EMNofSeattle]

There is nothing "stable" about nuclear power's role in the national energy discussion.

Yes, there is, it provides stable baseload power for years with almost no fuel inputs.

 

[longview]

There is nothing "stable" about nuclear power's role in the national energy discussion.

So if they turned off every single nuclear power plant, it would not impact our grid stability?
Think of the idea that a manufacturing facility needs a stable electricity supply to conduct business.

 

[Volunteer]

Well it’s very easy to arrive at a cost

I don’t play this game. your Sierra club nonsense doesn’t mean anything in real life

What's the cost per mwh?

 

[BirdinHand]

What's the cost per mwh?

A little over $30 currently.

 

[Mr Person]

Germany plans to destroy this village for a coal mine. Thousands are gathering to stop it | CNN

It's a stark image in 2023: Police in riot gear flooding a village, pulling people out of houses and tearing down structures to make way for the arrival of excavating machines to access the rich seam of coal beneath the ground.

edition.cnn.com

LMAO!

Emojis, representing the entirety of the poster's thought process. What a beautiful way to demonstrate the intellectual vacuum that is denierism.

Ok so not only are you so filled with hate that you've not stopped to think about a bunch of human beings being forced from their homes, but you also have no idea how irony works.

All to defend the most destructive form of energy in human history. Remember when you used to pretend you cared about "real pollution?"

What you're really doing is virtue signalling. You just hate liberals.

Dismissed.

And trolling the forum. Never forget that.

 

[Volunteer]

A little over $30 currently.

This cost includes government subsidies for nuclear insurance, DOE functions, NRC regulatory, waste management, anti-terrorist policing - all stuff we taxpayers contribute. Lazard says the (unsubsidized) levelized cost of electricity is closer to $100/megawatt hr.

 

[PoS]

Emojis, representing the entirety of the poster's thought process. What a beautiful way to demonstrate the intellectual vacuum that is denierism.

Yeah, I deny your moronic religion's apocalyptic predictions, thats what. So why havent you sold all your possessions yet since you believe the world is ending.

And trolling the forum. Never forget that.

LOL the irony meter just broke again.

Your high priestess just got arrested too. Maybe she could use your legal advice.

Climate activist Greta Thunberg detained by police in Germany at coal mine protest | CNN

Climate activist Greta Thunberg has been detained by police at a protest in Germany.

edition.cnn.com

 

[BirdinHand]

This cost includes government subsidies for nuclear insurance, DOE functions, NRC regulatory, waste management, anti-terrorist policing - all stuff we taxpayers contribute. Lazard says the (unsubsidized) levelized cost of electricity is closer to $100/megawatt hr.

And?

We subsidize every energy sector. Energy is sort of important and an area where the government should be involved, don’t you think?

 

[Volunteer]

And?

We subsidize every energy sector. Energy is sort of important and an area where the government should be involved, don’t you think?

Former Chairman of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, physicist Gregory Jaczko -

"We have to stop believing the hype. Nuclear has never delivered on the hype, and to somehow hinge the future of the planet on unproven design is simply, I think, irresponsible, and we have to recognize that or we’re going to be throwing money at the technologies that are simply never going to deliver."

 

[BirdinHand]

Former Chairman of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, physicist Gregory Jaczko -

"We have to stop believing the hype. Nuclear has never delivered on the hype, and to somehow hinge the future of the planet on unproven design is simply, I think, irresponsible, and we have to recognize that or we’re going to be throwing money at the technologies that are simply never going to deliver."

Yes, he’s pretty famous for being anti-nuclear.

What other viable energy alternative IS there? We have to be moving away from fossil fuels…whether for environmental, economic, geopolitical, etc reasons.

So what other viable alternative energy source can we use?

 

[Volunteer]

Yes, he’s pretty famous for being anti-nuclear.

What other viable energy alternative IS there? We have to be moving away from fossil fuels…whether for environmental, economic, geopolitical, etc reasons.

So what other viable alternative energy source can we use?

I'm biased towards solar. I've installed it, commercially, and I designed our new home powered with 100% solar. The $150/mo that I used to pay Duke Energy is gone. My system will pay for itself a decade before the warranties expire.
No more paying for heat and air conditioning. Solar isn't solving 100% of the nation's energy challenges but, hell, a 30-50% reduction in fossil fuels will be good for the country and the planet.

 

[longview]

I'm biased towards solar. I've installed it, commercially, and I designed our new home powered with 100% solar. The $150/mo that I used to pay Duke Energy is gone. My system will pay for itself a decade before the warranties expire.
No more paying for heat and air conditioning. Solar isn't solving 100% of the nation's energy challenges but, hell, a 30-50% reduction in fossil fuels will be good for the country and the planet.

Just curious, but if you installed enough to supply Winter heating, and perhaps some Summer AC, how much surplus do you generate
in the Spring and Fall?