[Willie Green]

 Electricity Production by Source (1999) 

Country		Production (billion kWh)		Fossil Fuel %		Hydroelectric %		Nuclear %		Other %
Austria		59.283		29.53		67.65		0		2.82
Belgium		79.829		40.01		0.42		58.33		1.24
Denmark		37.885		88.40		0.07		0		11.53
Finland		75.792		41.88		16.77		28.82		12.53
France		497.260		9.69		14.39		75.43		0.49
Germany		531.377		63.29		3.59		30.3		2.82
Greece		46.432		89.60		9.72		0		0.68
Ireland		19.542		94.42		4.23		0		1.35
Italy		247.679		79.09		18.08		0		2.83
Luxembourg		0.648		36.88		53.09		0		10.03
Netherlands		85.294		90.25		0.11		4.27		5.37
Portugal		41.696		79.97		17.25		0		2.78
Spain		197.694		57.71		12.10		28.28		1.91
Sweden		146.633		5.53		47.24		45.42		1.81
United Kingdom		342.771		69.38		1.55		26.28		2.39
Total European Union		2409.815		50.86		12.45		34.06		2.57
United States		3678.000		69.64		8.31		19.8		2.25

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[backhoe]

Willie, thanks for posting this. We could use so much of the vast coal reserves we have, and free up oil and gas for other purposes.

Just FYI, when I toured the local electric plant, McManus, in 1964, it was a triple-fuel facility- oil, gas, or coal.

Even then, they were burning pulverized coal and there was no- zero- smoke. Just clear, hot gas exited the stack. The advances in treating stack gasses since that time have been enormous, and most people aren't even aware they exist, but the difference is vast.

[alloysteel]

There is an excellent way to turn coal into relatively hot, clean-burning energy. As coal is virtually all carbon, with some volatiles, the first step is to drive out the volatiles by forcing superheated steam through a bed of finely crushed coal. The superheated steam is sent through a condensation tower, where the various fractions are recovered, and the steamed coal, now a very porous substance that resembles charcoal briquets, is sent into a retort, where, in the absence of air, it is heated to near incandescence. There is a very narrow range of temperature, which if the almost pure carbon is sprayed with water, the reaction goes completely to carbon mnoxide and free hydrogen, both excellent gaseous fuels. The product of combustion using this mixture is carbon dioxide and water, no nitrous oxides, no sulfur oxides, no particulates, just lots of clean hot energy.

These principles were well known over a century ago, and had been extensively developed by German chemists and used in heavy manufacture, of both steel and coal-tar products. The trick today is to make the process even more cost-effective than it now is, by engineering the various steps to limit or totally eliminate emmissions, and more efficient use of the energy expended.

[nightdriver]

One thing Bush could do is remove X42's silly national monument designation from those beds of clean-burning coal that are found in Southern Utah.

It just makes sense to start with a clean-burning fuel if you want a clean fire.

[o_zarkman44]

Northern Missouri has large deposits of coal of a high sulphur content. I understand the technology has been refined to efficiently remove the sulpher content. Hundreds of jobs were lost as the result of the mines being closed down.

Huge power plants, once powered by Missouri coal are shipping trainloads of Montana and Wyoming coal to Missouri. The expenditure of energy transporting the coal compared to locally produced coal, and the local jobs produced make coal a bargain. Unfortunately, environmentalists have sounded the acid rain, global warming alarm. But someday, the energy will have to be exploited regardless of the consequences.