20 countries commit to phase out coal by 2030

[The Caspian Hare]

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/2120267/market-has-moved-world-has-moved-20-countries-join-global-alliance-phase

Quote

 

Twenty countries and two US states have joined an international alliance to phase out coal from power generation before 2030, environment ministers said on Thursday.

Since signing the Paris Agreement in 2015, which aims to wean the world off fossil fuels, several countries have made national plans to phase out coal from their power supply mix.

The Powering Past Coal alliance brings together many of these countries and others that will commit to phasing out coal, sharing technology to reduce emissions, such as carbon capture and storage, and encouraging the rest of the world to cut usage.

Coal is responsible for more than 40 per cent of global emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

 

 

[Piney]

It should have been phased out 30 years ago...

[FLOMBIE]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

It should have been phased out 30 years ago...

In favour of what, though? Nuclear energy?

[GlitterRose]

Not us, though. 

Get out your scrub brushes, folks. Time to clean the coal. 

Lol. 

I have to laugh about it, otherwise, I would go crazy. 

[Piney]

12 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

In favour of what, though? Nuclear energy?

Carter was pushing solar power. We actually installed a solar hot water heater and charging panel. Edmund Scientific was selling them all over the Pine Barrens. Then Reagan ripped the solar panels off the roof of the White House and cut the funding for the research. Set us back a bit it did.

[Likely Guy]

30 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Not us, though. 

Get out your scrub brushes, folks. Time to clean the coal. 

Lol. 

I have to laugh about it, otherwise, I would go crazy. 

Washington and Oregon signed on though.

[FLOMBIE]

22 minutes ago, Piney said:

Carter was pushing solar power. We actually installed a solar hot water heater and charging panel. Edmund Scientific was selling them all over the Pine Barrens. Then Reagan ripped the solar panels off the roof of the White House and cut the funding for the research. Set us back a bit it did.

Of course we have to keep developing solar power, but unfortunately it‘s not an equal substitute to coal up to this day. And certainly not 30 years ago. 

[Dark_Grey]

4 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

Of course we have to keep developing solar power, but unfortunately it‘s not an equal substitute to coal up to this day. And certainly not 30 years ago. 

What is the best alternative energy source we have today? What is the most viable alternative to coal? 

[Piney]

10 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

Of course we have to keep developing solar power, but unfortunately it‘s not an equal substitute to coal up to this day. And certainly not 30 years ago. 

But I think if they would of kept pushing the research back then it would have been far more advanced. Wind power too.

We also had a windmill back then and my stepfather hooked our windmill that powered our well pump up to a high output alternator which helped to keep our storage batteries charged.

[FLOMBIE]

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

But I think if they would of kept pushing the research back then it would have been far more advanced. Wind power too.

We also had a windmill back then and my stepfather hooked our windmill that powered our well pump up to a high output alternator which helped to keep our storage batteries charged.

You are completely right with that, indeed. We should go for renewable energies.

But if the substitute for coal would have to be nuclear energy, I am against it. 

[Piney]

Just now, FLOMBIE said:

But if the substitute for coal would have to be nuclear energy, I am against it. 

As I am.

I've seen the damage uranium mines cause and the hazards of waste storage and reactor mishaps.

[FLOMBIE]

20 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

What is the best alternative energy source we have today? What is the most viable alternative to coal? 

Solar, wind and hydroelectric power. Nuclear power. 

[Piney]

Just now, FLOMBIE said:

 hydroelectric power. Nuclear power. 

Which still causes damage to the environment.

[FLOMBIE]

Just now, Piney said:

Which still causes damage to the environment.

Solar parks and wind parks cause damage to the environment as well. We will always do that, in one way or the other. 

[The Silver Thong]

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

Which still causes damage to the environment.

What doesn't, the amount of oil to make solar is huge. Same with wind farming. Nuclear is pretty clean but you need to mine Uranium  but I hear the Clintons have some for sale, build the plants and it goes on. Upgrade the scrubbers on older coal plants it does work plus I would hate to pay 40 bucks every time I turned on a light bulb.  

[FLOMBIE]

5 minutes ago, The Silver Thong said:

What doesn't, the amount of oil to make solar is huge. Same with wind farming. Nuclear is pretty clean but you need to mine Uranium  but I hear the Clintons have some for sale, build the plants and it goes on. Upgrade the scrubbers on older coal plants it does work plus I would hate to pay 40 bucks every time I turned on a light bulb.  

There is nothing clean about nuclear waste. And if there is a major problem, we're screwed. 

[The Silver Thong]

2 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

There is nothing clean about nuclear waste. And if there is a major problem, we're screwed. 

I totally agree with you,Nuclear is pretty scary. But we can make coal cleaner. 

 

[FLOMBIE]

2 minutes ago, The Silver Thong said:

I totally agree with you,Nuclear is pretty scary. But we can make coal cleaner. 

 

Actually, the coal doesn't become cleaner. It's simply a more efficient use of the resource. But it stays a fossil fuel, and we should really try to move on from those. 

[The Silver Thong]

Just now, FLOMBIE said:

Actually, the coal doesn't become cleaner. It's simply a more efficient use of the resource. But it stays a fossil fuel, and we should really try to move on from those. 

It's a pipe dream to think we can move away from fossil fuel. We have over the last 100 years made humanity depend on it. We could go back to sail boats and the ox and cart. No matter what we do we can't escape it.  I wish we could

[FLOMBIE]

Just now, The Silver Thong said:

It's a pipe dream to think we can move away from fossil fuel. We have over the last 100 years made humanity depend on it. We could go back to sail boats and the ox and cart. No matter what we do we can't escape it.  I wish we could

Eventually, we will be able to do that. Hence I used the word "try". And that's what we should do. "Clean coal" is just a euphemism created by the coal industry. It's dirty. 

[The Silver Thong]

Just now, FLOMBIE said:

Eventually, we will be able to do that. Hence I used the word "try". And that's what we should do. "Clean coal" is just a euphemism created by the coal industry. It's dirty. 

Coal is dirty and so am I. I don't care what people call it. If the west removes coal from it's energy source will everyone else. I doubt it.  I never said we could make it clean but cleaner. We have to improve what we have is all. 

[Dark_Grey]

14 minutes ago, FLOMBIE said:

Eventually, we will be able to do that. Hence I used the word "try". And that's what we should do. "Clean coal" is just a euphemism created by the coal industry. It's dirty. 

"Trying" to get off coal so far has been a huge expense with minimal gains. What happened to Thorium and other nuclear off-shoots of the past 20 years?

[FLOMBIE]

1 minute ago, The Silver Thong said:

Coal is dirty and so am I. I don't care what people call it. If the west removes coal from it's energy source will everyone else. I doubt it.  I never said we could make it clean but cleaner. We have to improve what we have is all. 

"Cleaner" is the wrong word. It's a euphemism. More efficient is more accurate. And who cares if the rest of the world dumps it as well? 

Yes, we have to improve our ways to collect renewable energy, so it can satisfy our basic needs. That is a more interesting route than making coal more efficient. 

[FLOMBIE]

2 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

"Trying" to get off coal so far has been a huge expense with minimal gains. What happened to Thorium and other nuclear off-shoots of the past 20 years?

You don't strive for development? Do you easily give up after a setback? 

[toast]

1 hour ago, Dark_Grey said:

What is the best alternative energy source we have today? What is the most viable alternative to coal? 

Windpower.