Oh Chuck.....

[Klause]

Japan is building 45 new coal fired power plants. Right now.



So much for solar panels and wind turbines LOL

[binthere]

with the nuclear power plants down solar and wind would of been a good replacement. not to be though.

[Oliver88]

I suppose this means Japan isn't willing to charge their taxpayers for EXPENSIVE and UNRELIABLE power.

Are they not worried about their "social license" like Wynne, Trudeau and Notley tell us about?!

[sofa.king]

Carbon tax has nothing to do with environment. It is all about money for a bankrupt govt

[mcfarms]

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[furrowtickler]

Sofa king correct ✅

[blackpowder]

Well, at least we're too righteous to sell them the coal. LMFAO

[malleefarmer]

aussie coal betcha

[SASKFARMER3]

Lets just face the facts we have a idiot PM who has no clue what things cost.
We have Provincial and Federal Debt that is so out of hand its not even funny.
We have liberals who got in and think they are the moral compass of the world and they know whats good for the general dumb population.
Why would we not sell products like our coal uranium and oil or here is a idea why not use these in clean new power plants and have no problems.

This whole bull shit with wind and solar is so idiotic and costly it will bankrupt some. Before the population finally runs out of patients and gets rid of the cause.

[chuckChuck]

Japan warned of flaw in coal-fired power plants project

Expansion presents risk of $60bn in ‘stranded’ assets and ignores renewables, says Oxford study
Japan is planning to invest huge sums in coal technology to replace the winding down of nuclear power © Bloomberg
May 11, 2016

by: Leo Lewis in Tokyo

Japan’s plans for a massive expansion of coal-fired electricity generation are based on flawed projections and risk saddling the country with more than $60bn of “stranded” assets, a new report has warned.

The study, compiled by Oxford university’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, calls on Shinzo Abe, the prime minister, to reconsider plans to invest huge sums in coal technology to replace the winding down of nuclear power.
Sample the FT’s top stories for a week

It says the plan takes Japan’s energy policy in the opposite direction to other developed nations and condemns the country to growing environmental risk.

The 2011 Tohoku earthquake, which led to a meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant, forced Japan into a large-scale rethink of its energy policy.

But critics say Mr Abe’s administration has allowed its post-Fukushima energy policy to be hijacked by companies determined to promote fossil fuel-burning technologies at home and abroad.

​In all three scenarios forecast in the report, Japan’s power companies faced combined writedowns or devaluations of at least $50bn.

“This highlights the risk of continuing to proceed with the planning and development of new coal-fired power plants in Japan,” said the report, which will be presented in Tokyo on Thursday to senior Japanese officials, corporate lobbyists and business leaders.

All but one of Japan’s nuclear reactors, which previously met 29 per cent of the national energy demand, remain shut down, with the shortfall met by increased reliance on oil, gas and coal.

Ben Caldecott, the report’s main author, said current plans to build 49 new coal-fired power plants and 28 gigawatts of additional capacity cannot be economically justified, and would exceed the capacity required to replace the retiring fleet by 191 per cent.

The resulting overcapacity, combined with stiffening competition from solar and other renewable sources, creates a risk that assets amounting to about 25 per cent of power companies’ market capitalisation could become “stranded” — subject to premature writedowns or conversion to liabilities.

Mr Caldecott said the flaw at the heart of the coal plan was that it ignored the accelerating risk of disruption to incumbent utilities.

Renewables deployment has risen from 10 per cent of global capacity to 15 per cent in the past five years, while the costs of onshore wind and solar have fallen by 39 per cent and 41 per cent respectively over the same period. Japan’s plans, Mr Caldecott said, make the assumption that the country’s power sector will remain static and “safe” for thermal coal assets — an assumption that runs counter to the evidence from elsewhere in the G20.

“Does Japan seriously think that there will still be coal-fired power stations in the system in the 2070s? Because that is what they are committing themselves to with the plans they have laid out,” he said.
Critics say Shinzo Abe’s administration has allowed its post-Fukushima energy policy to be hijacked by corporate Japan © AP

The Oxford university report comes amid criticism from Mutsuyoshi Nishimura, Japan’s former climate change ambassador to the UN, over the Abe government’s willingness to promote domestic companies leading the way in so-called “clean coal” technology.

“Lamentably, the Japanese government has not taken the lessons of other parts of the world and has let corporate Japan take over,” Mr Nishimura said on Wednesday. “The value of the [Oxford] report is that someone is clearly proving to the authorities how dangerous are these plans to burn more fossil fuel.”

Japanese companies are major innovators and exporters of clean coal technology. The country’s two largest government financing arms have between them made Japan the largest supporter of coal-fired generation expansion around the world.

[chuckChuck]

Japanese government planning to build 45 new coal fired power stations to diversify supply
ABC Rural
By Babs McHugh

Updated about 11 hours ago

The Japanese government is moving ahead with its plans to build up to 45 new coal fired power stations.

The power plants will utilise high energy, low emissions (HELE) technology that use high-quality black coal.

Japan is the largest overseas market for Australian coal producers, taking more than a third of all exports.

Tom O'Sullivan, a Tokyo based energy consultant with Mathyos Global Advisory, said in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, Japan started importing more liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Australia.

But he said the move to more coal fired power was because coal was cheaper than LNG, and the energy security was priority for the government.

"Japan needs to import 95 per cent of all its energy sources," he said.

"So it's trying to diversify its fuel sources and it doesn't want to be too reliant on any one market."

Japan has ratified the Paris Climate Agreement and committed to a 26 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030.

But Mr O'Sullivan said Japan was yet to price carbon emissions.

"Although Japan spent $US36 billion dollars on commercial solar power last year, and is planning much more, there is no carbon price," he said.

"So at this stage there is no incentive to not build coal fired power station, unlike other countries and states that can have a price as high as $US35-40 per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted."

Mr O'Sullivan said while community and environmental groups had expressed concerns about the construction of a major coal power station, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was firmly behind the plans.

He said the decision would ensure the use of coal in Japan would continue well into the middle of the century.

"These guys [private companies] are not going to go ahead and [put money into] in large capital investments unless they have a 30-year depreciation period," he said.

"So if they're building these coal power plants now it is reasonable to expect them to be still on the books by the end of 2050."
HELE power plants and emissions reduction

There are a number of different types of HELE power station technologies. In Australia, the CSIRO has been working on different programs to further the use of them.

The Minerals Council of Australia and the Federal Government are on the record saying HELE coal fired power plants produce half of the emissions of traditional plants.

But David Harris, a CSIRO research director in the Low Emissions Technology Department, said it was not as straight forward as that.
"The average global efficiency of existing power plants now is probably less than about less than 34 per cent," he said.

"If we could raise that global average to around 40 per cent, that's equivalent to removing two gigatons of carbon dioxide a year.

[chuckChuck]

The previous 2 articles give some background as to why Japan is investing in coal to replace Nuclear. As I have said before we are still going to need fossil energy sources for a long time. But renewables will become more and more of the diverse supply.

"Although Japan spent $US36 billion dollars on commercial solar power last year, and is planning much more, there is no carbon price," he said.

[binthere]

stiffening competition compliments of the tax payer sounds familiar.

[oneoff]

The horseshit above coming from the cut and paste service of someone who plans on burning all the fossil fuels that he may need "for a long time into the future"

His words printed numerous times lately.

So although there are staunch supporters who will lecture; they are certainly not those who lead.

Look at the powerhousesolar.ca for Ontario Hydro Solar PV for the month of January just finished.

A two week stretch of diffuse sunlight producing a fraction of a few measly Kwh from a bit of diffuse sunlight for a very limited number of hours. Just the example Western Canada should follow?
In case some haven't noticed; a certain Mr Trump praised good clean Kentucky coal and vowed to get those miners back on the job. And for those who are intent on making their economies uncompetitive and running on uncontrolled debt....does anyone think this economic plan will turn out well?????

I'm going back to sleep and quit wasting time on nonsense.

[chuckChuck]

What is wrong with cutting and pasting relevant articles? If you don't want to read them don't.

Before you make any decision do you rely on only what you know or do you do some research and get some analysis from other sources that have some expertise or opinions?

We have heard you argument about solar production in winter. This is not news.

What about wind? What is your analysis on the proposed Sask Power 1600 Mw of wind?