60 Minutes Wyoming Green Energy Segment

[Ben Lamb]

The carbon capture sounds great in principal, in reality it is just another hoop for generators to jump through at a large additional cost per Mwh of generation. A large part of the reason coal isn't cost competitive in the generation market is the already added costs of scrubber operation (additional electric consumption, limestone cost, man hours), mercury technology, NOx reduction, etc. Carbon capture would be far more expensive to operate than all these other efforts. Coal has come a long way in cleaning up it's act, but it's at a point where it can't really compete economically, especially when large government subsidies are getting poured into renewables. I'm all in on cleaning up the environment, but you can't pour money into one segment of the business who isn't capable of sustaining steady output and force the reliable, steady generators out of business and expect good things in the future.
My plant went through a natural gas conversion several years ago, and can fire on either gas or coal. We are one of the lucky ones, so many coal plants are closed or have announced closure plans. What many people are missing, including the ones making decisions on the grid capacity, is there are occasions, especially in winter when the grid is getting to the breaking point. Christmas eve last year several parts of the country were going through rolling brown outs and the NE was one or two unit trips away from brown outs. I was working that day and we were hanging on with a couple units by our fingernails.
The more old reliable base load plants get forced off, the dimmer our energy future gets in this country. The longer I work in electric generation, the more I'm just amazed when I come home that the light switch still works.

Carbon capture has been promoted as saving the coal industry for 20 years. It's a panacea.

 

[VikingsGuy]

The carbon capture sounds great in principal, in reality it is just another hoop for generators to jump through at a large additional cost per Mwh of generation. A large part of the reason coal isn't cost competitive in the generation market is the already added costs of scrubber operation (additional electric consumption, limestone cost, man hours), mercury technology, NOx reduction, etc. Carbon capture would be far more expensive to operate than all these other efforts. Coal has come a long way in cleaning up it's act, but it's at a point where it can't really compete economically, especially when large government subsidies are getting poured into renewables. I'm all in on cleaning up the environment, but you can't pour money into one segment of the business who isn't capable of sustaining steady output and force the reliable, steady generators out of business and expect good things in the future.
My plant went through a natural gas conversion several years ago, and can fire on either gas or coal. We are one of the lucky ones, so many coal plants are closed or have announced closure plans. What many people are missing, including the ones making decisions on the grid capacity, is there are occasions, especially in winter when the grid is getting to the breaking point. Christmas eve last year several parts of the country were going through rolling brown outs and the NE was one or two unit trips away from brown outs. I was working that day and we were hanging on with a couple units by our fingernails.
The more old reliable base load plants get forced off, the dimmer our energy future gets in this country. The longer I work in electric generation, the more I'm just amazed when I come home that the light switch still works.

Lots of good points about limitations on many renewables, need for grid, conversion of existing facilities instead of mothballing - but in no way does coal make sense in 2023. It needs to be fully replaced by at least natural gas and preferably nuclear backbone supporting various renewables. I am no lefty and no tree hugger, but coal is bad mojo all around.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Carbon capture has been promoted as saving the coal industry for 20 years. It's a panacea.

And even then, use it for other emitters such as concrete manufacturing and don't use it to limp along another few decades with coal.

 

[BigHornRam]

Carbon capture has been promoted as saving the coal industry for 20 years. It's a panacea.

60 Minutes promoted it in this segment 17 years ago. Nothing ever came of it, which is standard for every green energy idea they promote. Yet here we are in 2023, and both 60 Minutes and coal are still business!

60 Minutes · Season 38 Episode 23 · Montana’s Coal Cowboy, On The Waterfront, To Walk Again

Montana’s governor Brian Schweitzer claims the solution to high oil prices are right here at home. With all the coal in Montana, he claims there’s enough potential diesel fuel to enable the U.S. to refuse to bow down to current suppliers overseas. Also, the sale of U.S. port terminals to Middle...

watch.plex.tv

 

[buckbull]

There are quite a few popping up around here. Solar farms, too.

There is a large wind farm between Springfield and Bloomington and they have now converted what must be at least 200 acres into solar panels. This is some of the best farm ground in the world, produces 200+ bushels of corn per acre without blinking an eye. Now all solar panels. Would love to see the numbers comparing what they are making on on solar energy to corn/beans.

 

[SAJ-99]

Funny how “consume less energy” never seems to be on anyone’s list of solutions.

Not completely true. For the last 20yrs we have been flat or declining (depending on how you want to measure) in energy consumption per capita. It is probably where we have made the most progress. But there are still people that protest LED lightbulbs. The From-my-cold-dead-hands incandescent crowd, if you will. Gasoline cars have improved significantly as well. Funny how that line starts down after the gasoline spike in the 70’s. Progress is often slow and little noticed.

 

[BigHornRam]

It's always funny to see the internet debate over what is largely settled & accepted, even by states like WY.

The WGA is pushing decarbonization. Not exactly the center for biological diversity. Energy economies shift over time. We used to rely on whale oil & kerosene. We will transition away from fossil fuels eventually. Smart leaders plan the transition. Others just stole the fire of divisiveness to encourage their own political machinations.

Explore the potential for natural carbon sequestration at the Boise workshop of WGA's Decarbonizing the West Initiative | WGA

The second workshop of Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon's WGA Chair initiative, Decarbonizing the West, will be held in Boise, Idaho, on December 12 and 13. It will explore topics related to natural sequestration, agriculture, forestry, and land management. Register here to join in the conversations.

westgov.org

I am all for carbon sequestration through good forestry and agricultural practices, Ben. The durable carbon market idea they mention is farce, however. Coal, oil, and gas are some of the West's legacy industries, are they not?

"Boise workshop of the Decarbonizing the West initiative workshop focused on strategies for expanding natural carbon sequestration methods as a way to not only decarbonize the atmosphere but also create an avenue by which the West’s legacy industries can thrive in a decarbonized future. "

 

[Dave N]

There is a large wind farm between Springfield and Bloomington and they have now converted what must be at least 200 acres into solar panels. This is some of the best farm ground in the world, produces 200+ bushels of corn per acre without blinking an eye. Now all solar panels. Would love to see the numbers comparing what they are making on on solar energy to corn/beans.

My dad had an outfit that had a proposal for solar farming recently. It offered an amount per acre before installation, after, and increased a percentage every year for 20 years. It was WAY more than what he gets rented out for farming. He was considering it for the income and for leaving it for us kids later but had issues with how it would be divided equally between us and never called them back.

 

[MITCHMO]

This has nothing to do about the economics of alternative energy. Do you really think these politicians are altruistic and concerned about "Mother Earth"??? If you do, I have a bridge to sell ya. You shouldn't be asking questions like you did above. You should be asking: Where are they getting their skim. That's it in a nutshell.

I’m 100% convinced their priorities are power and money. If they can gain either of those two things by riding a green bandwagon, they do it. Try setting up your own solar and it becomes very apparent that helping “Mother Earth” isn’t the priority. It’s a joke when you look at the details.

 

[jryoung]

There is a large wind farm between Springfield and Bloomington and they have now converted what must be at least 200 acres into solar panels. This is some of the best farm ground in the world, produces 200+ bushels of corn per acre without blinking an eye. Now all solar panels. Would love to see the numbers comparing what they are making on on solar energy to corn/beans.

Likely a steady guaranteed income for 20 to 25 years through a power purchase agreement. There's a large practice in solar to target low value ag land close to transmission for projects. It CA specifically it insulates farmers from commodity pricing variances and drought issues.

 

[BigHornRam]

There is a large wind farm between Springfield and Bloomington and they have now converted what must be at least 200 acres into solar panels. This is some of the best farm ground in the world, produces 200+ bushels of corn per acre without blinking an eye. Now all solar panels. Would love to see the numbers comparing what they are making on on solar energy to corn/beans.

High school friends in SW Wisconsin, where I deer hunted growing up, leased their ground to a wind energy company to erect 2 windmills, around 10 years ago. They sent me a picture of their deer stand right below the windmill, taken by a construction worker that was on top of the windmill. It looked tiny! Sales pitch from wind company paints a pretty picture. Friends have some financial security, and can continue to farm, unlike leasing your property to build a solar farm.

Quilt Block Wind Farm | EDPR North America

Wind Farm | Wisconsin

www.edpr.com

 

[JCS]

I always kinda chuckle around my area when they talk green energy. I work for a company that has gravel pits and does road work. Last year we got a contract for gravel to go to windmills. We crushed 750000 tons of gravel. Then hauled it to the windmill site and stocked piled it. It was a round trip of 140 miles at 40 ton loads per truck. We used 1000s and 1000s of gallons on fuel. Basically ruined the highway. All in the name of green energy.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I always kinda chuckle around my area when they talk green energy. I work for a company that has gravel pits and does road work. Last year we got a contract for gravel to go to windmills. We crushed 750000 tons of gravel. Then hauled it to the windmill site and stocked piled it. It was a round trip of 140 miles at 40 ton loads per truck. We used 1000s and 1000s of gallons on fuel. Basically ruined the highway. All in the name of green energy.

Pretty sure I know the project you are talking about. It will provide power for 25+ years to around 300k people. The diesel fuel and concrete are a drop in the bucket - and I can promise you any generating facility has lots and lots of concrete.

There's no such thing as "green energy" only energy we produce that affects the ecology/environment in a different capacity.

 

[JCS]

Pretty sure I know the project you are talking about. It will provide power for 25+ years to around 300k people. The diesel fuel and concrete are a drop in the bucket - and I can promise you any generating facility has lots and lots of concrete.

There's no such thing as "green energy" only energy we produce that affects the ecology/environment in a different capacity.

Didn't mention the concrete part because that is coming from another supplier. When I drove thru the area, I thought it looked like an oil boom with all the action but it's just a windmill boom.

 

[JCS]

If they would just call it an energy source and not green energy......

 

[BigHornRam]

Pretty sure I know the project you are talking about. It will provide power for 25+ years to around 300k people. The diesel fuel and concrete are a drop in the bucket - and I can promise you any generating facility has lots and lots of concrete.

There's no such thing as "green energy" only energy we produce that affects the ecology/environment in a different capacity.

That part you dismiss in all this, without the massive subsidies, projects like this would not be financially feasible to construct.

 

[SAJ-99]

That part you dismiss in all this, without the massive subsidies, projects like this would not be financially feasible to construct.

You dismiss the tax advantages given to oil and gas.

 

[BigHornRam]

You dismiss the tax advantages given to oil and gas.

Source?

 

[WYelker]

As one other poster mentioned. None of this is about the environment, it is about power and money. I point to one glaring example of this issue...

The BLM office in Rawlins, WY was revamped under some former presidents investment policy. Bush or Obama, does not matter. But when they did the revamp they installed a windmill, it worked great. In fact it works so well that they have to turn it off for over 75% of the month. Under the law they can not keep the Windmill running as it creates to much energy and at a certain point every month they have to shut it off otherwise it exceeds the allowable production and would need to be licensed as a power plant. I am not sure if the rules have changed but anytime we are in Rawlins, early in the month the blades are turning late in the month they are off...

If this was really about the environment then it would be easy and affordable for every building to have its own setup.

 

[jryoung]

Source?

I've shared this before, and I wish the Nuclear Industry would update this study (they originally commissioned it when they were asking for Federal loans guarantees for Vogtle). Certainly the renewable mix would change significantly over the past 13 years, I'd love to know where it is now.



EDIT* They did update it in 2016.

Analysis of U.S. Energy Incentives, 1950-2016

This 2017 study revealed that though billions of dollars in energy incentives came in various forms, only 8 percent was spent on nuclear energy. The study covers all incentives, including tax breaks, regulation exemptions and technology transfer from government to industry.

www.nei.org