On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 10:24:40 -0600, dpb wrote:

On 2/5/2020 9:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, February 5, 2020 at 9:11:05 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/5/2020 12:34 AM, dpb wrote:
On 2/4/2020 10:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/4/2020 10:54 PM, dpb wrote:
On 2/4/2020 8:46 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 2/4/2020 9:34 PM, dpb wrote:
On 2/4/2020 7:57 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
...

I recently posted numbers on the amount of fuel we burn and it is
incredible.* Burning fuel adds heat.* I'm not qualified to say how
much but the scientists seem to think it is quite a bit.
...

You seem totally unaware yet of the issue that is supposedly the
crux of the problem is the "greenhouse gas" effect; mostly CO2 is
the supposed culprit.

If there were no waste heat but the CO2 was emitted the models
would show essentially the same result; the waste heat is radiated
to the black sky for the most part.

--
Burning fuel makes both heat and CO2.* Stop burning as much.* Simple.

And put a segment of the economy completely under, sure.

I've been in the coal fields of E KY, VA, WVA selling, installing and
servicing a line of online coal analyzers.* These had the ability to
keep independent smaller mines open by sorting clean coal from
not-so-clean such that a significant fraction of production could
avoid having the extra cost of washing.* That saved real jobs for
real people.

For larger operations, they enhanced profitability with the same net
result of maintaining operating ability that otherwise was lost.

At mine-mouth power plants, they had a similar function in being able
to reduce emissions by knowing coal quality going in.

At prep plants, they loaded trains to match customer specifications.

There isn't much in those hills except coal; preventing them from
being able to make a living with what has been provided is not good
sense in my book.

--

Think long range.* Same at stagecoach makers, horse shoe makers, you
don't suddenly stop and put them out of work.* Times change,
industries change, people adapt.* Same as they have for centuries.

Biden is going to give them all jobs as coders too.

Good luck with that...

Until you been there, you can't begin to imagine.

Easy to blow 'em off when you're comfy in your own living room with a
comfortable living.

--

Not blowing them off at all. It can be evolution, not revolution. It
won't happen in five years either but do you continue to poison our
atmosphere forever?

We have to look at what is good for the world, not just a few jobs that
can be replaced over time. Things ar slow at the buggy whip factory too.
...

If you shut all of 'em down worldwide, it would only reduce annual
emissions by roughly 1/3rd. While of some benefit, it isn't a panacea.

C sequestration is feasible; there's even a pretty important use for CO2
in enhanced petroleum recovery to the point the local ethanol plant has
a very cost-effective byproduct revenue stream by putting it pipeline to
W TX Permian Basin region 800 mi away.

Putting the whole US coal industry out of business instead is nonsense.

What kind of a future do you see for coal? To me, the writing is on the
wall. Coal is in its last dying gasps as an industry. Yes, there is still a
****load in the ground, but that's where it should stay, IMHO.

The part that makes no sense to me is the idea of keeping a dying industry
alive because a few people will lose a nasty job that probably killed lots
of their ancestors. They need to let it go and find something else to do.