Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Squeezing Coal To Reduce Emissions

Posted by timothy on from the soon-you-will-have-to-register dept.

sbszine writes "Australian newspaper The Age has an interesting story on squeezing coal before burning it in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The process, discovered by Victorian scientists, is expected to make brown coal (lignite) burn 30% cleaner. Good news, as Australia is the world's number one exporter of coal."

5 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Victorian scientists... my goodness by ssclift · · Score: 4, Funny

    I know Slashdot posts the occasional late story, but this is over 100 years old... that must be a record.

    :-)

  2. Huh-huh-huh, You said "Squeeze" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Squeezing can only hold back your emissions for so long.

  3. It makes perfect sense... by ResidntGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    Anthracite, the cleanest-burning coal, is also called hard coal because it's the densest variety and it contains the least moisture. Lignite, the type they squeezed, is the crappiest kind of coal. It is almost half water and is quite light. How many brilliant people did it take to think "maybe if we make lignite denser and take the water out, it'll burn more cleanly!"???

    --
    ResidntGeek
  4. My question.... by theslashdude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...is how much energy does it take to squeeze the coal? Because if they end up having to burn 30% more coal to generate the additional energy needed to squeeze the coal, then it's not much of a gain.

  5. Re:Question by be951 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Who, exactly is touting this as good? If you believe in man made climate change, 30% less damaging than coal just isn't good enough. We need to be moving away from fossil fuels, not finding marginally less damaging ways to burn them.

    First, you don't need to believe in man made climate change to consider less pollution "good". Also, I agree that we should be moving to non-polluting (or as nearly as possible) energy sources, but that isn't going to happen until clean energy sources are reasonably cost competitive on a scale that allows similar capacity. So realistically the two options are: keep burning coal the old way until alternatives are adopted; or burn significantly cleaner until alternatives are adopted.