China to build 1 fucking huge coal plant......

[MKSheppard]

http://www.straitstimes.com/eyeoneastas ... 06,00.html

Massive coal-fired power plant to come up in Anhui

It will produce more electricity than Three Gorges Dam

BEIJING - China, grappling with a widening power crunch, is planning a giant coal-fired power project that will generate more electricity than even the massive Three Gorges Dam, an industry official said.

Huaneng Group, the parent of Huaneng Power International, aims to build the giant thermal plant with China Power Investment Corp and Huainan Mining Group, said Mr Pu Hongjiu, vice-director of the China National Coal Association.

The project, to be built in the eastern province of Anhui, is expected to have a capacity of 20,000MW by 2020, outstripping the world's biggest hydropower project being built on the Yangtze River, Mr Pu told a forum on Monday.

'The Thermal Three Gorges will ease the power crunch and fuel economic growth in the Yangtze river delta,' Mr Pu said. The Three Gorges Dam will have a capacity of 18,200MW when all 26 generators start operation by 2009.

Worried that transportation bottlenecks and a lack of long-term contracts could lead to shortages of the chief fuel for the world's seventh-biggest economy, China's Cabinet recently called for greater industry cooperation, Mr Pu said.

A coal squeeze since late last year has threatened normal operation of thermal power plants and contributed to the worst electricity crunch in 20 years, with China facing a shortfall of 40,000MW this year.

'The transportation bottleneck is one of the main reasons for the coal squeeze,' Mr Pu told an industry forum in Beijing. 'Pit-mouth power plants will effectively ease the bottleneck and reduce transportation costs.'

China's coal production is based mainly in the northern and western areas while most demand is on the eastern coast. But the overloaded railway system can transport only 40 per cent of the coal that needs to be shipped, industry officials said earlier.

Meanwhile, state media reported that China will officially open its west-east pipeline today, starting the flow of natural gas from the far west to the fast-growing east.

The pipeline, built at a cost of US$4 billion (S$6.9 billion) to US$5.2 billion, will transport 12 billion cubic metres annually from the Tarim Basin in the north-western Xinjiang region to the Yangtze Delta region in the east, the China Daily reported.

The Tarim Basin boasts a gas reserve of 8,400 billion cu m. It is estimated that its total verified geological gas reserve will exceed 10 trillion cu m by 2010.

The pipeline will guarantee a stable gas supply for at least 30 years, said an official. -- Reuters

[aerius]

Let's see, typical coal plant efficiency is about 36%, coal burning is ~2.7e7J/kg assuming perfect combustion. 20GW plant, that's a bit over 2 tons of coal being burned every second, which works out to over 63 million tons of coal being burned every year. That is a fucking shitload of coal.

[Pu-239]

Not to mention hideous pollution and whatnot.

[Master of Ossus]

Thank you, China, for once again totally neglecting the environment in favor of short-term economic goals.

On the other hand, this is one huge fucking power-plant. I wonder if it's going to be effective.

[MKSheppard]

Thank you, China, for once again totally neglecting the environment in favor of short-term economic goals.

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

[Sea Skimmer]

That is a fucking insanely powerful coal plant; I'd love to see it when it's completed, and coal yards around it. Though I do wonder if this is just a misinterpretation and they don't acutely indeed to build one giant plant at one spot, but rather a wider project. Though I suppose it would make sense as it would simplify the distribution grid which would be built for a very high voltage.

[Master of Ossus]

Thank you, China, for once again totally neglecting the environment in favor of short-term economic goals.

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

Seriously. The Kyoto dealie was so flawed that it boggles the mind anyone would support it.

[Rogue 9]

Thank you, China, for once again totally neglecting the environment in favor of short-term economic goals.

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

Seriously. The Kyoto dealie was so flawed that it boggles the mind anyone would support it.

My brother tried to whack me with a bokken when I pointed out that Bush was not, in fact, being an idiot when he rejected that treaty. Then again, he'll agree with anything as long as Bush opposes it, so I shouldn't be surprised...

[Stormbringer]

Thank you, China, for once again totally neglecting the environment in favor of short-term economic goals.

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

Seriously. The Kyoto dealie was so flawed that it boggles the mind anyone would support it.

Never underestimate the ignorance of Granolacis Liberalis, better known as the Damn Dirty Hippy.


All most of them know or cared was it was supposed to save the ozone and had no clue at all beyond that. Honestly it's astounding but they have no idea at all how Kyoto would do that, just that they'd been told it would. And of course any one that opposed it must be evil or retarded or both.

[Quadlok]

Honestly, I'd like to see them scrap this plan in favor of turning Tibet into one giant solar and wind farm. Just so I can see hippies heads explode as they try and figure out whether to support it.

But seriously, does China have like zero uranium reserves? Seems like they'd be all about the nuke plants, if for no other reason than to be able to have as massively overblown a stockpile of nuclear weapons as the US and Russia.

[Stormbringer]

But seriously, does China have like zero uranium reserves? Seems like they'd be all about the nuke plants, if for no other reason than to be able to have as massively overblown a stockpile of nuclear weapons as the US and Russia.

They might well in the future but China's reactors aren't any great shakes and so I don't think they're inclined to rely too heavily on them.

[Seggybop]

According to the latest issue of Wired magazine I read, they're planning to build a massive amount of pebble-bed nuclear reactors in the near future.

[Gil Hamilton]

Ah, I see that China has decided that it needs a new giant cloud of toxic smog for it's landscape.

[Rogue 9]

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

Seriously. The Kyoto dealie was so flawed that it boggles the mind anyone would support it.

Never underestimate the ignorance of Granolacis Liberalis, better known as the Damn Dirty Hippy.

FUQ!

[Gil Hamilton]

Geez, Rogue, you're just FUQing everything.

[Rogue 9]

Geez, Rogue, you're just FUQing everything.

What? That's only two in the past week. I've done far, far bigger sprees before. I think my record is five in one day.

[The Kernel]

And kyoto wanted to exempt them from a lot of shit.

Seriously. The Kyoto dealie was so flawed that it boggles the mind anyone would support it.

Never underestimate the ignorance of Granolacis Liberalis, better known as the Damn Dirty Hippy.


All most of them know or cared was it was supposed to save the ozone and had no clue at all beyond that. Honestly it's astounding but they have no idea at all how Kyoto would do that, just that they'd been told it would. And of course any one that opposed it must be evil or retarded or both.

I still don't think Bush should have walked away from it like that. Instead, why not simply point out what is wrong and how horribly one-sided it was, then demand that it be shifted to a proposal that would actually be effective, fair and reasonable. Sure, it probably wouldn't have gotten the concessions needed to make it a worthwhile thing for the US to sign, but at least it would have sent a clear and effective message that the environment is an important concern.

[Gil Hamilton]

And hey, you know, using the Logic of the Chinese Government, this has the positive side effect of exposing millions and millions of Chinese citizens to highly toxic smog, thus helping their overpopulation problem and making China a better place.

[Gil Hamilton]

What? That's only two in the past week. I've done far, far bigger sprees before. I think my record is five in one day.

It's OK. The only person who FUQs me is Shep.

[Rogue 9]

What? That's only two in the past week. I've done far, far bigger sprees before. I think my record is five in one day.

It's OK. The only person who FUQs me is Shep.

I've never been FUQed except as the brunt of a joke, to my knowledge. You lucky bastard.

[The Kernel]

I've never been FUQed except as the brunt of a joke, to my knowledge. You lucky bastard.

He's lucky to be FUQ'ed by Shep? Man, you really need to get out more...

[Rogue 9]

I've never been FUQed except as the brunt of a joke, to my knowledge. You lucky bastard.

He's lucky to be FUQ'ed by Shep? Man, you really need to get out more...

Forgot the sarcasm tags. Sorry.

[Sea Skimmer]

I still don't think Bush should have walked away from it like that. Instead, why not simply point out what is wrong and how horribly one-sided it was, then demand that it be shifted to a proposal that would actually be effective, fair and reasonable. Sure, it probably wouldn't have gotten the concessions needed to make it a worthwhile thing for the US to sign, but at least it would have sent a clear and effective message that the environment is an important concern.

No, a better idea would have been to completely abandon the idea of reducing CO2 emissions until we actually know if human produced CO2 is having an effect on the environment, and that realistically achievable reductions in that CO2 would change anything. In the mean time we could have everyone agree to further reductions in other airborne pollutants, which we already for know are causing trouble. That's win win.

[The Kernel]

No, a better idea would have been to completely abandon the idea of reducing CO2 emissions until we actually know if human produced CO2 is having an effect on the environment, and that realistically achievable reductions in that CO2 would change anything. In the mean time we could have everyone agree to further reductions in other airborne pollutants, which we already for know are causing trouble. That's win win.

I certainly agree with reducing airborne pollutants we know to be toxic, but I don't think we can dismiss the possible negative impact of excess CO2 that easily.

Here's why: We know that phenomenon known as "global warming" is a very real condition, what we don't know is whether or not our output of CO2 is actually contributing to it. If we assume that our CO2 emissions are NOT contributing to global warming and we make a shift towards low CO2 emission industry (UELEV vehicles, low/zero CO2 power generation, etc) while developing alternative fuels we are talking about a high cost to shift our industry over gradually (and I am not talking about completely eliminating CO2 emissions btw) but nothing that would totally destroy our economy, especially when stretched over 20 years.

If it IS true that global warming is a serious threat as has been suggested, then we are talking about a potential climate shift which could have implications FAR greater then the cost of shifting a percentage of our industry/automobiles to low/zero CO2 standards.

While I agree in principle that we need to have a good grasp on the implications of global warming before making drastic shifts, the chances of figuring this out before it becomes too late to prevent a disasterous climate shift are low.