To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

List of least carbon efficient power stations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a list of least carbon efficient power stations in selected countries. Lists were created by the WWF and lists the most polluting power stations in terms of the level of carbon dioxide produced per unit of electricity generated. In general lignite burning coal-fired power stations with subcritical boilers (in which bubbles form in contrast to the newer supercritical steam generator) emit the most.[1][2] The Chinese national carbon trading scheme may follow the European Union Emission Trading Scheme in making such power stations uneconomic to run.[3][4] However some companies such as NLC India Limited and Electricity Generation Company (Turkey) generate in countries without a carbon price. Lignite power stations built or retrofitted before 1995 often also emit local air pollution.[5][6][7][2] In early 2021 the EU carbon price rose above 50 euros per tonne, causing many of the European plants listed below to become unprofitable,[8] and close down.[9] However, because many countries outside Europe and the USA do not publish plant level emissions data it was difficult to make up to date lists. Public information from space-based measurements of carbon dioxide by Climate Trace is expected to quantify CO2 from individual large plants before the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference,[10] thus enabling large polluters to be identified.[11]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    814 327
    2 311 982
    2 397 697
    3 526 265
    1 883 574
  • Which Power Source Is Most Efficient?
  • Can 100% renewable energy power the world? - Federico Rosei and Renzo Rosei
  • The Biggest Lie About Renewable Energy
  • How This Fusion Reactor Will Make Electricity by 2024
  • Denmark's $34BN Energy Islands Could Solve Europe's Power Problem

Transcription

This episode of Dnews is brought to you by Domain.com. Fossil fuel energy is the most common type of power plant in the United States, but solar just hit a HUGE milestone that might make them finally shine past the competition. For all the talk about solar panels being better for the environment, they are still notoriously inefficient… or were, until now. Australian researchers from University of New South Wales created the most efficient solar panels ever; these new panels convert 46-percent of their sunlight energy into electricity. Typical rooftop panels hover around 15 percent at best. This new technology works by distributing the solar collection into three cells picking sunlight up in multiple wavelengths, and then reflecting the excess light at a fourth panel! Genius! So 46. Percent… Yep… Ahem… [[pause]] 46% doesn't SOUND like much, does it? Right? It's less than half! Traditionally, power plants usually use heat to create steam and move turbines. Those turbines generate the electric current. I bet you're as curious as I was about which plants are the most efficient, but they're doing better than a LOT of them. To calculate efficiency of a power plant, you take the output power and heat, add that together, and divide by the total amount of power produced. Essentially, you're accounting for the fact that burning fuels is HOT, and you lose a lot of heat in the power transfer. Let me give you an example, in the U.S., there are over 1400 coal power plants burning this fossil fuel at an efficiency of about 33%. Meaning two-thirds of ALL ENERGY from coal in a plant designed to use coal to create electricity is lost. Even the most efficient plants are only 45 percent. Nuclear energy, also measured by the previous equation, ranges from the low 30s to the high 40s… With the best, most heat efficient plants topping out around 48-percent. As technology improves, and the population has become more interested in environmental protection, both coal and nuclear have become more efficient. But if we're all honest with each other, making the plant perform better isn't easy. Instead, a quick solution is to take the heat exhaust and loop it back into the plant. This conserves those extra BTU's of heat, rather than letting them float away into the atmosphere. Some plants do this to conserve as much heat as they can. They can also help burn the fuel more efficiently, or fine tune the plant to keep it tip top. Unfortunately, wind power is the big loser outside of commercial solar, but even with that, they're running anywhere from 25 to 50 percent efficiency. It varies depending on the design, and the location. Offshore wind farms run more often than on-shore ones, but the efficiency depends on how hard the wind is blowing and how much of that wind power the turbine can harvest. Lots of scientists are working on making super efficient wind power. Biomimicry is a big part of their recent advances, with some scientists discovering that mimicking sharks, whales or birds will help make the installations capture more energy. This also informs the winner and champion of ALL these power generation solutions -- hydroelectric. The biggest hydroelectric installations can get a 95-percent efficiency, and even the smaller ones can still hit 85. 85 is a LOT more than the next closest. It's pretty incredible. But when you take into account the simplicity, the eye is drawn right back to solar. Sure, coal and nuclear have a lot of bang for their buck, solar needs a lot of space, and sun… but while 46-percent didn't sound like a lot before… an infinitely renewable, non-polluting energy solution that is essentially equal in efficiency to other major generation techniques sounds pretty darn good. No? And by the way, if you’re looking for an efficient way to buy a domain name, look no further than Domain Dot Com! No domain extension will help you tell your story like a DOT COM or DOT NET domain name. And because you watch DNews, you can get 15% off Domain Dot Com’s names and web hosting by using the code DNews when you check out.

2015 report - companies

In 2015 the Stranded Assets Programme at the University of Oxford’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment published Stranded Assets and Subcritical Coal report analyzing inter alia carbon intensity of subcritical coal-fired power stations of 100 largest companies having these power stations.[12]

CO2 intensity
(kg/kWh)
Company Country Number of SCPS
1.447 NLC India Limited  India 2
1.342 Madhya Pradesh Power Generation Company Limited  India 3
1.279 GDF Suez  France 10
1.277 Kazakhmys  Kazakhstan 4
1.269 West Bengal Power Development Corporation  India 5
1.253 OGK-2  Russia 4
1.243 Maharashtra State Power Generation Company  India 7
1.240 Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand  Thailand 4
1.226 Termoelectrica  Romania 17
1.222 RAO UES  Russia 23
1.220 ČEZ Group  Czech Republic 13

2005 report - power station from 30 industrialised countries

[13]

CO2 intensity
(kg/kWh)
Power station Country Note
1.58 Hazelwood Power Station, Victoria  Australia closed in 2017
1.56 Edwardsport IGCC, Edwardsport, Indiana  United States closed in 2012
1.27 Frimmersdorf power plant, Grevenbroich  Germany closed in 2017
1.25 HR Milner Generating Station, Grande Cache, Alberta,  Canada converted to gas in 2020
1.18 Emilio Portes Gil, Río Bravo  Mexico
1.09 Bełchatów Power Station, Bełchatów  Poland
1.07 Prunéřov Power Station, Kadaň  Czech Republic partially closed
1.02 Niihamanishi [ja], Niihama  Japan

2007 list - Europe

[14]

CO2 intensity (kg/kWh) Power Station, Location Country Fuel Emissions (MtCO2)
1.350 Agios Dimitrios Power Station, Agios Dimitrios, Kozani  Greece Lignite 12.4
1.250 Kardia Power Station, Kardia Kozanis  Greece Lignite 8.8
1.200 Niederaussem Power Station, Niederaussem  Germany Lignite 27.4
1.200 Jänschwalde Power Station, Jänschwalde  Germany Lignite 23.7
1.187 Frimmersdorf Power Station, Grevenbroich  Germany Lignite 19.3
1.180 Weisweiler Power Station, Eschweiler  Germany Lignite 18.8
1.150 Neurath Power Station, Grevenbroich  Germany Lignite 17.9
1.150 Turów Power Station, Bogatynia  Poland Lignite 13.0
1.150 As Pontes Power Station, Ferrol  Spain Lignite 9.1
1.100 Boxberg Power Station, Boxberg, Saxony  Germany Lignite 15.5
1.090 Bełchatów Power Station, Bełchatów  Poland Lignite 30.1
1.070 Prunéřov Power Station, Prunéřov  Czech Republic Lignite 8.9
1.050 Sines Power Station, Sines  Portugal Hard Coal 8.7
1.000 Schwarze Pumpe power station, Spremberg  Germany Lignite 12.2

2018 - largest emitters

The table lists the largest emitters, regardless of their carbon efficiency.[15]

CO2 intensity (kg/kWh) Power Station Country 2018 emissions (MtCO2)
1.8 Bełchatów  Poland 38
1.5 Vindhyachal  India 34
1.5 Dangjin  South Korea 34
1.5 Taean  South Korea 31
1.3 Taichung  Taiwan 30
1.5 Tuoketuo  China 30
1.5 Niederaussem  Germany 27
1.4 Sasan  India 27
1.5 Yonghungdo  South Korea 27
1.4 Hekinan  Japan 27

Other

At over 1.34 tCO2-e/MWh Yallourn is the most carbon intense in Australia.[16]

In the very unlikely event of being built, the proposed Afşin-Elbistan C power station would become the least carbon efficient coal-fired power station.

External links

Sources

  • Boom and Bust 2021: Tracking The Global Coal Plant Pipeline (Report). Global Energy Monitor. 2021-04-05.

References

  1. ^ Kittel, Martin; Goeke, Leonard; Kemfert, Claudia; Oei, Pao-Yu; von Hirschhausen, Christian (2020-04-20). "Scenarios for Coal-Exit in Germany—A Model-Based Analysis and Implications in the European Context". Energies. 13 (8): 2041. doi:10.3390/en13082041. hdl:10419/222434. ISSN 1996-1073.
  2. ^ a b Witkop, Nathan (11 May 2020). "Old German lignite units have entered death zone". Montel News. Retrieved 2020-06-10.
  3. ^ Slater, Huw (5 May 2020). "Despite headwinds, China prepares for world's largest carbon market". The Interpreter. The Lowy Institute. Retrieved 2020-06-10.
  4. ^ International Carbon Action Partnership (5 May 2021). "China National ETS". Retrieved 8 May 2021.
  5. ^ "Tuzla 7 lignite power plant, Bosnia and Herzegovina". Bankwatch. Retrieved 2020-06-10.
  6. ^ Balkan Green Energy News (2019-11-04). "KEK to get EUR 76 million grant to cut pollution from Kosovo B power plant". Balkan Green Energy News. Retrieved 2021-05-08.
  7. ^ Mohan, Vishwa. "CPCB threatens to shut down 14 coal-fired power plants which failed to limit emissions". The Economic Times. Retrieved 2020-06-10.
  8. ^ "EU carbon price breaches record €50 per tonne mark". www.businessgreen.com. 2021-05-04. Retrieved 2021-05-09.
  9. ^ "The new EU climate target could phase out coal power in Europe as early as 2030". ScienceDaily. Retrieved 2021-05-09.
  10. ^ "Transcript: The Path Forward: Al Gore on Climate and the Economy". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2021-05-06.
  11. ^ "A tidal wave of new carbon emissions data soon will be upon us | Greenbiz". www.greenbiz.com. Retrieved 2021-05-09.
  12. ^ Caldecott, Ben; Dericks, Gerard; Mitchell, James (March 2015). Stranded Assets and Subcritical Coal: The Risk to Companies and Investors (PDF). ISBN 978-0-9927618-1-3.
  13. ^ WWF Australia: Hazelwood tops international list of dirty power stations, Dated: 13 Jul 2005
  14. ^ Dirty Thirty, May 2007
  15. ^ Grant, Don; Zelinka, David; Mitova, Stefania (2021). "Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-polluting power plants". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (9): 094022. Bibcode:2021ERL....16i4022G. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac13f1. ISSN 1748-9326.
  16. ^ "Yallourn, Australia's dirtiest power". Environment Victoria. 2019-05-21. Retrieved 2020-06-12.
This page was last edited on 15 January 2024, at 05:09
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.