Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More than 1,000 New Coal Plants Planned Worldwide
Climate Central ^ | 11/26/12 | Damian Carrington

Posted on 11/26/2012 4:41:39 PM PST by Libloather

More than 1,000 New Coal Plants Planned Worldwide
By Damian Carrington, The Guardian
Published: November 26th, 2012

More than 1,000 coal-fired power plants are being planned worldwide, new research has revealed.

The huge planned expansion comes despite warnings from politicians, scientists, and campaigners that the planet's fast-rising carbon emissions must peak within a few years if runaway climate change is to be avoided and that fossil fuel assets risk becoming worthless if international action on global warming moves forward.

Coal plants are the most polluting of all power stations and the World Resources Institute (WRI) identified 1,200 coal plants in planning across 59 countries, with about three-quarters in China and India. The capacity of the new plants add up to 1,400GW to global greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of adding another China — the world's biggest emitter.

(Excerpt) Read more at climatecentral.org ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; coal; electricity; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; plants
And the US gets further and further behind.
1 posted on 11/26/2012 4:41:44 PM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather

I think in the US, cheap nat gas is a bigger problem for coal than the Baraqqis.

I talked to an exec of a company that makes fracking equipment, and he said fracking is just on the verge of going bigtime worldwide. Not Western Europe, because of the environazis, but darn near everywhere else. Nat gas and coal are going to be very affordable for a long time.


2 posted on 11/26/2012 4:45:27 PM PST by nascarnation (Baraq's economic policy: trickle up poverty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Coal company announces layoffs in response to Obama win
3 posted on 11/26/2012 4:46:10 PM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
They just don't want the US to have any.

From the beginning, the purpose of the "climate change" scheme was global wealth-redistribution.

4 posted on 11/26/2012 4:48:01 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Labor unions are the Communist Party of the USA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: palmer

Follow the money. Buffett buys a railroad. Our coal needs to be shipped by rail. Obama breaks the coal companies and when they ho bankrupt we will see who buys them. My guess is Soros and buffett


5 posted on 11/26/2012 4:51:02 PM PST by South Dakota (shut up and drill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

With the money they save they can pay more for food, driving up it’s price for us while we’re paying higher “environmentally friendly” energy prices.

That’s a ‘two-fer’ in the Dems’ media.


6 posted on 11/26/2012 4:52:15 PM PST by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Can anyone provide a citation of a credible source of evidence that a moderate increase in the the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide could cause significaant warming of the earth’s atmosphere?
What I’ve read thus far is that gaseous CO2 has a very limited and readily saturable capacity to absorb long wave solar back radiation.


7 posted on 11/26/2012 4:54:10 PM PST by Elsiejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Well, the environazis have scared us off nuclear and have been working against coal and natural gas for electricity generation for decades.

They want us using wind and solar exclusively, but that is entirely unreliable.

I guess we could use a vast array of squirrel and hamster cages, if it weren't for PETA.

These nutballs are going to make us all dehydrate, starve and freeze to death in the dark unless we get them under control, and there's really only one way to do that in the final analysis.

8 posted on 11/26/2012 4:54:49 PM PST by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Well you know the air over the US stays over the US.

All of those coal plants will be polluting their own countries only.

So if we clean our air Americans will be able to breathe while these other countries are suffocating.

Yeah folks that’s sarcasm.


9 posted on 11/26/2012 5:02:06 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
Well you know the air over the US stays over the US.

All of those coal plants will be polluting their own countries only.

ROFL, but I think that Jay Leno's street people believe it.

10 posted on 11/26/2012 5:14:53 PM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

The third world desperately needs reliable cheap electricity. Without it there is miserable poverty, famines, and political instability. Third world countries have no choice but to invest in coal. They either do not have natural gas or the infrastructure to transport it where it is needed. They do not have the technical expertise to construct and operate nuclear power plants. China and India despite a relatively well educated population and ambitious plans to develop nuclear energy have to date been unable to open new nuclear plants. Wind and solar are simply niche options at best and can never power a modern grid. Obama may wish to lower US fossil fuel consumption and the American standard of living, but most of the world does not share his bizarre green fantasies.


11 posted on 11/26/2012 5:34:45 PM PST by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

This is Obastard’s fault.


12 posted on 11/26/2012 5:58:17 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Why is the government more concerned about protecting a microbe on Mars than an unborn baby here?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsiejay

Google Lord Monkton.

His presentations point out that CO2 has been slightly increasing for the past 20 years, but the global temperature has been declining. Also ... that increasing temperature causes increased CO2, not the reverse.


13 posted on 11/26/2012 5:58:59 PM PST by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FReepers; Patriots; FRiends


Some make more than one donation
Many make none
Have YOU contributed?


14 posted on 11/26/2012 5:59:25 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Elsiejay
Can anyone provide a citation of a credible source of evidence that a moderate increase in the the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide could cause significaant warming of the earth’s atmosphere?

What I’ve read thus far is that gaseous CO2 has a very limited and readily saturable capacity to absorb long wave solar back radiation.

I have been challenging global warming alarmists with a similar question for a long time, and no one has really been able to provide an answer.

Now, I will become technical.

As far as I can tell, the whole idea that CO2 can trap heat in the air is based on its behavior as a fluorophore within the infrared range of the spectrum. In fluorescence, a molecule absorbs a photon of light at one wavelength, and releases it at a slightly longer wavelength. The energy difference between the absorption/emission wavelength is typically translated into various kinds of molecular energy--e.g., kinetic energy. CO2 happens to have an unusually wide fluorescent band within the IR range. Since both absorption and emission take place within the IR range, there is no net change in the quantity of IR light (IR converts to heat). There is a slight increase in the energy of CO2--which also converts to heat. I see no net increase of heat here. Someone once told me that the CO2 can, in fact, transfer some of its energy to another atmospheric molecule (most likely nitrogen) during the few nanoseconds between absorbing and emitting a photon, and in that manner, trap energy in the atmosphere. But that depends on it actually bumping into another molecule during that short window of time; I'm not sure the atmosphere is dense enough for that to happen enough to actually be a significant factor in heating the atmosphere. Also, heat radiates back into space fairly quickly.

In answer to your question, I have not actually seen any papers published in Science that show any calorimetric measurements of IR irradiated CO2 in a closed system. However, I've seen plenty of papers blaming everything under the sun on "global warming"--even in Science.

15 posted on 11/26/2012 6:30:52 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
All the people in the countries building coal fired power plants are doomed to a life of unhappiness. Want proof? Just read about the "Happy Planet Index” which ranks Venezuela, Albania, and Cuba Far as far happier than the United States because they don't use all the evil fossil fuels we use.


16 posted on 11/26/2012 7:15:26 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsiejay
As far as I can determine, there is no actual evidence. The warmist "evidence" consists solely of computer models, which can be made to say anything the modeller wants.

Any "data" the warmists present have been cherry-picked to support their conclusion. For example, they will say something like "The temperature and CO2 concentrations are positively correlated since 1970", completely ignoring that they are negatively correlated in the time period 1940 - 1970.

17 posted on 11/26/2012 8:16:30 PM PST by sima_yi ( Reporting live from the far North)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Wait, didn’t the usurper promise to shut down coal mines 4.5 years ago?


18 posted on 11/26/2012 8:36:01 PM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

The Russians have a shale formation that is eighty times the size of the Bakken Play. It’s in Western Siberia and is called the Bazhenov Formation.


19 posted on 11/26/2012 8:50:12 PM PST by Gluteus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom

Amazing, according to that map there should be a large flow of people travelling South across our border since Mexico is such a “happy” place.../S


20 posted on 11/26/2012 9:18:58 PM PST by az_gila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Good on China for telling the global warmists to kiss their collective asses.


21 posted on 11/27/2012 10:07:16 AM PST by Graybeard58 (What G.O.P.e. candidate is in store for us in 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsiejay
Can anyone provide a citation of a credible source of evidence that a moderate increase in the the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide could cause significaant warming of the earth’s atmosphere?

From what I've been reading recently, we are in the midst of cyclical "global cooling" and have been for the past 10-15 years. Al gore and his ilk are on the wrong horse. If they live long enough they can catch the next natural cycle of "global warming".

22 posted on 11/27/2012 10:13:08 AM PST by Graybeard58 (What G.O.P.e. candidate is in store for us in 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; 11B40; A Balrog of Morgoth; A message; ACelt; Aeronaut; AFPhys; AlexW; alrea; ...
DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News Site

Latest from Greenie Watch

Latest from Real Climate

Latest from Climate Depot

Latest from Junk Science

Latest from Terra Daily

23 posted on 11/27/2012 4:56:38 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Obama should change his campaign slogan to "Yes, we am!" Sounds as stupid as his administration is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

“From what I’ve been reading recently, we are in the midst of cyclical “global cooling” . . ..”

I’d like to be able to cite some such sources and their rebuttals of global warming for the edification of editors of local newspapers I read.


24 posted on 11/27/2012 9:05:54 PM PST by Elsiejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson