• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Looks like diesel gonna be a problem.

Indeed, but if we don't need their energy, its just one less lever available. Since resources and needs are not equally distributed the problem will never magically vanish, I'm not quite that delusional, but I just want a new season in the endless series of "we need a thing that someone else has". We've been on the oil one for long enough. Time to rehash the same story with some different characters.
 
The reality is that we require energy dense power sources like oil, natural gas and coal to function. This will not change anytime soon. With all the resources put into renewable energy it didn't change this dynamic in any appreciable way. Much of the resources spent on renewables should have gone to developing thorium reactors. This would have changed the world in a much more positive way for centuries to come. Even then, we would still need energy dense fuels in large quantities for society to function. The beauty of thorium reactors is they can be scaled from large to small to fill a large number of use cases where only energy dense fuels can be used today.
 
"The reality is that we require energy dense power sources like oil, natural gas and coal to function. This will not change anytime soon."

This statement is not 100% correct. I worked in the power industry from 1997 to 2024 and saw the closure of every coal fired customer in New England. There are zero coal fired power plants now. There are still some in PA but those are aging out as natural gas is much cheaper, cleaner and more efficient. The combined cycle gas plants are cheaper to build and require a lot less people to operate. And the small GE and Pratt & Whitney peaking units can be operated remotely. Gas, once the most expensive fuel, is now the cheapest and will be around for the foreseeable future. Coal is 19th century technology and while abundant, is dead. Only one person seems to not know this.
 
Coal is still being used today in the US although in less quantity. Much of the reason the coal industry declined is due to federal regulations, and in particular, greenhouse gas limits. Coal plants still supplies around 15% of US electricity demand and would be much higher without punitive federal regulations being in place. This said, fracking has made natural gas very competitive regarding power generation. In my statement, coal was listed as just one of the sources. The ones that are irreplaceable today are the portable energy dense options like oil and, to a lesser extent, natural gas. Coal is far from dead. It is used in steel production, exported and who knows how it will be used in the future. Today over 50% of China's electricity comes from coal fired plants and it is nearly 70% for India. Overall, one third of the world's electricity generation comes from coal fired plants.
 
TomD62 said:
Coal is 19th century technology and while abundant, is dead. Only one person seems to not know this.
Click to expand...

My question is: Do we have enough 'other fuel' power plants, currently operating, to make up for the loss of the coal fired plants?

I'm all for eliminating coal fired plants, as long as it doesn't drastically (or even moderately) reduce needed supply.
 
China Electricity Generation Mix (Mid-2026)
    • Coal: ~54% of total electricity production.
    • Hydropower: ~14% of generation.
    • Solar: ~12% (split evenly between utility-scale and rooftop/behind-the-meter).
    • Wind: ~11% of the electricity mix.
    • Natural Gas: ~3% of production.
    • Nuclear: ~4% of generation.
    • Biofuels & Others: ~2%. [1]

Key Energy Milestones
    • Capacity vs. Generation: Solar recently overtook coal as China's largest source of installed capacity (reaching over 1.28 terawatts by mid-2026), but coal still leads in actual electricity generated because thermal plants run more continuous hours. [1, 2]
    • Sub-50% Coal Generation: During the first half of 2026, monthly coal-fired generation dipped below 50% of the total mix during specific periods of high renewable output, marking a historic transition milestone. [1, 2]
 
TomD62 said:
China Electricity Generation Mix (Mid-2026)
    • Coal: ~54% of total electricity production.
    • Hydropower: ~14% of generation.
    • Solar: ~12% (split evenly between utility-scale and rooftop/behind-the-meter).
    • Wind: ~11% of the electricity mix.
    • Natural Gas: ~3% of production.
    • Nuclear: ~4% of generation.
    • Biofuels & Others: ~2%. [1]

Key Energy Milestones
    • Capacity vs. Generation: Solar recently overtook coal as China's largest source of installed capacity (reaching over 1.28 terawatts by mid-2026), but coal still leads in actual electricity generated because thermal plants run more continuous hours. [1, 2]
    • Sub-50% Coal Generation: During the first half of 2026, monthly coal-fired generation dipped below 50% of the total mix during specific periods of high renewable output, marking a historic transition milestone. [1, 2]
Click to expand...
This is a perfect example for showing the failure of wind and solar as a reliable, and viable, energy source. Add in the environmental damage done by solar, wind and hydropower, along with cost, and the use of coal might not be so bad after all. Burning coal can be made clean and for a fraction of the cost of wind and solar.

As a side note, the environmental damage being done to the Yangtze River by the Three Gorges Dam is catastrophic due to the disruption of natural sediment deposition below the dam site. The ecosystem in this area is either dead or dying. Also, the natural flooding cycles below the dam has been disrupted causing severe damage to wetland areas. This has also had catastrophic economic effects for millions and millions of people who made a living from the river's food resources below the dam.
 
OldJBL said:
The reality is that we require energy dense power sources like oil, natural gas and coal to function. This will not change anytime soon.
Click to expand...
I know there isn't a magic wand anyone can wave and completely fix the problem overnight, but I also am not interested in the "having tried nothing, we're all out of ideas" approach either.
 
gadget73 said:
I know there isn't a magic wand anyone can wave and completely fix the problem overnight, but I also am not interested in the "having tried nothing, we're all out of ideas" approach either.
Click to expand...
I agree. What irritates me is we waste trillions on trying to develop energy sources that will never be a long term solution. When one sits back and analyzes solar it becomes obvious that it can't be a viable solution in any mass quantity scenario. Then sit back and look at thorium reactors and we should be going at their development, and production, on the scale of the Manhattan Project.

Having one robust, large scale, efficient form of energy production like thorium reactors makes it possible to produce other forms of energy like hydrogen. Hydrogen can replace oil based forms of energy in many use cases. The byproduct from using it for fuel is water. Thorium reactors and electrolysis is a match made in heaven. Thorium reactors aren't sci-fi level technology.
 
Last edited:
solar is fine as a supplement. Put it on the roofs of all these massive warehouses that keep getting built. It can be done in a much shorter time than a reactor, and its space efficient since it can live on top of existing structures. Have it on my house, its nice not having a big electric bill.

but I'd also love to see them build more reactors at the plant down the road. They stopped at 3, but apparently the pie in the sky plan many decades back was a total of 6. After decades of development it should be possible to build a far more powerful and effective reactor than the 40+ year old units that are there. Build one that recycles spent fuel maybe, there are 3 units and 40+ years worth sitting right there on site.
 
rickb119 said:
My key indicator is heartburn, which is caused by anything containing seed oils; with Canola being the worst offender. Fortunately, I learned to cook (instead of buying the packaged crap), and no longer have that problem.

I cook/bake with butter and/or coconut oil. The only exception is banana bread, which I used non-hydrogenated shortening. That too caused mild heartburn, so this year I'm going to use real lard (not the shelf stable kind). Lard is what grandma used.
Click to expand...
A couple unsolicited thoughts/tips,..

Try adding avocado oil to your arsenal. A very healthy oil, light in flavor, and safe at higher heats.

When baking quick breads (banana, cranberry, pumpkin, zucchini, whatever), try subbing applesauce for the oil/fat component. Works well, yielding a nice moist bread with a good crumb.
 
rickb119 said:
My key indicator is heartburn, which is caused by anything containing seed oils; with Canola being the worst offender.
Click to expand...
I've given up on buying mass produced baked goods for this reason. Not sure what oil specifically that causes heartburn but it seems to be the one that makes me feel like my mouth is lined with grease. There is also just something in all of that stuff that has a weird chemical taste that I can't quite describe beyond "tastes like new car smell".

Ick and good riddance to all of it.
 
MuseChaser said:
A couple unsolicited thoughts/tips,..

Try adding avocado oil to your arsenal. A very healthy oil, light in flavor, and safe at higher heats.

When baking quick breads (banana, cranberry, pumpkin, zucchini, whatever), try subbing applesauce for the oil/fat component. Works well, yielding a nice moist bread with a good crumb.
Click to expand...
About the only thing I fry anymore is eggs. For that I use coconut oil.

I make bran muffins with applesauce, and also make an applesauce cake, from time to time. As to the banana bread, I'll most likely stick to grandma's recipe, but thanks for the suggestion. I'm really looking to forward to making it with lard this time around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom