Zero-Emission Fossil Fuels

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Sure, zero emission coal would be a win for everyone.  Except for those of us who object to coal sludge in our water, I mean.

Even if you whip ALL the emissions associated with fossil fuels, it is a notoriously dirty process to get them out of the ground in the first place.  Mercury, lead, sulfur, arsenic, selenium, and a whole host of other contaminants you wouldn't want to get within a long mile of if you could help it are intrinsic to the extraction processes.

Granted, renewables have their own problems.  We all remember the horror of the big Wind Spill Of 2005 - flags fluttered as much as 100 feet way and at least half a dozen birds were momentarily startled.  Tragic.

Boru

wind power is a big problem for birds actually, it kills thousands of birds a year. But the problem with it is that there isn't enough of it to power much of anything. If are willing to not use electricity then wind power is great.

It was just a snarky comment pointing out that renewables are, on balance, much safer that fossil fuels.

And yes, wind turbines kill (according to some estimates) about 300 000 birds worldwide every year. Out of a total bird population of 400 billion. This is something under .0001%. Trust me - the bird population is in no danger.

As for how much wind can power, a 3 MW turbine can generate about 6 million KwH of electricity in a year (an average house uses about 4000 KwH in a year). We currently get about 5% of our electric here from wind power. Not a huge amount, true, but it is projected to triple over the next 10 years.

Boru