Talk:Coal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Cscr-former.svg Coal is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
September 12, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Wikipedia CD Selection
WikiProject icon Coal is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Coal at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
 
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Geology (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Coal is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Energy (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Environment (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Citizendium Porting (Last updated: Never)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Citizendium Porting, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles by working in any useful content from their Citizendium counterparts. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
 
Note icon
This article is out of date with its Citizendium counterpart and needs to be updated.
Current with its Citizendium counterpart article as of: Never

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2

Contents


[edit] Somewhat amibiguous sentence

Near the end of the Early uses as fuel section:

Without coal, Britain would have run out of suitable sites for watermills by the 1830s.

Presumably this means that coal added power generation capacity beyond what would be possible with only watermills, but I'm not certain. Could we nail this down in the article? Vranak (talk) 21:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] CO2 emission info on liquefaction

It says liquefaction of coal has "generally greater" CO2 emissions, but not by how much greater. Given that the paragraph has lots of figures in it, this seems like a glaring (deliberate?) omission. I haven't been able to find an exact figure yet - but industry lobby puts forward a derisory figure that goes against common sense (heating coal to huge temperatures cannot possibly mean "equal or slightly higher" emissions) while others cite much higher figures. If this is an area of controversy, the wiki should cover it.


"The total well-to-wheels emission rate for conventional petroleum-derived fuel is about 27 pounds of CO2 per gallon of fuel. If the CO2 from the liquid coal plant is released into the atmosphere, based on available information about liquid coal plants being proposed, the total wellto-wheels CO2 emissions from coal-derived fuelwould be about 50 pounds of CO2 per gallon— nearly twice as high." http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/coal/liquids.pdf

"In a Congressional hearing held in April 2005, David Hawkins of the Natural Resources Defense Council testified that even if 90% of the carbon from a coal-to-liquids plant were to be captured and successfully sequestered, the “well-to-wheels” CO2 emissions would still be 8% higher than for petroleum production and refining." http://meic.org/egaging-quizes/energy/how-do-co2-emissions-from-coal-to-liquid-fuel-syngas-compare-to-petroleum-based-diesel-fuel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.239.1 (talk) 12:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Rationalize the units

There are too many different units in the article. Please rationalize the units. Also, it would be good to move the consumption and reserves sections together so that there can be a discussion of how future expectations for coal supplies. Avram Primack (talk) 04:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Resource

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-25/fossil-fuels-beaten-by-renewables-for-first-time-as-climate-talks-founder.html Renewable Power Trumps Fossils for First Time as UN Talks Stall by Alex Morales November 25, 2011; excerpt ...

Renewable energy is surpassing fossil fuels for the first time in new power-plant investments, shaking off setbacks from the financial crisis and an impasse at the United Nations global warming talks. Electricity from the wind, sun, waves and biomass drew $187 billion last year compared with $157 billion for natural gas, oil and coal, according to calculations by Bloomberg New Energy Finance using the latest data. Accelerating installations of solar- and wind-power plants led to lower equipment prices, making clean energy more competitive with coal.

99.181.134.134 (talk) 05:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Energy density of coal error

It looks like the values is incorrect. The correct value should be between 24 and 32 kJ/kg not 24 MJ/kg. The website that is cited http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/JuliyaFisher.shtml , However all of the links to the sources are broken. Furthermore it was complied by high school student, whom can be error pron. Later in the section "Carbon intensity", There is a different source cited, that claims 6.67 kWh/kg which is 24.01 KJ/Kg http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Calorific+value+of+coal

http://nuclearfissionary.com/2010/06/09/energy-density-and-waste-comparison-of-energy-production/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.201.51.24 (talk) 18:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural Usage

The article mentions that coal is the state mineral of Kentucky, but then claims coal is not a mineral. However, anthracite is a form of mineral coal, as stated on its page. I think the reference to coal not being a mineral is misleading and should be removed. Jjjam (talk) 15:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export