• news
  • SUNDAY DECEMBER 31 2006 5:00 AM

China's Coal Boom Creates Giant Poison Clouds



China is experiencing an unprecedented boom in coal mining (coal? they still have that?) and soon will have over 2500 poison-spewing new power stations and 21,000 mines in production. Smoke, carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide are vomiting out into the atmosphere, spreading cancer and heart and lung disease-making clouds across the Pacific Ocean all the way to California. The clouds are so massive they can actually be seen from space.

It's apparently not so nice in some cities:

"Cloaked in swirling mists of soot particles and smoke, cities such as China’s “coal capital” of Datong are entering the coldest period of winter in which demand for power and heating produces the worst pollution...
It is often darkness at noon in Datong, just 160 miles west of Beijing, where vehicles drive in daytime with their headlights on to grope through the miasma...

Cancer rates are soaring, child health is a time bomb and the population, many of whom are heavy cigarette smokers, are paying the price for China’s breakneck rush to riches and industrialisation — an estimated 400,000 premature deaths nationwide because of pollution every year."


Make no mistake, China is really into coal:

"China uses more coal than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined. And it has increased coal consumption 14 percent in each of the past two years in the broadest industrialization ever... Every week to 10 days, another coal-fired power plant opens somewhere in China that is big enough to serve all the households in Dallas or San Diego."


The only way China can afford to provide energy to such its vast population is by using coal, an outdated, cheap energy source. The problem grows exponentially as China's coal production has doubled in the last 5 years.

Link to NY Times online video piece, China's Dark Clouds.

via The Huffington Post

 
Comments
mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

DEC 31, 2006 05:20 AM

China uses more coal than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined.



It's getting to the point where China will use more of just about every resource than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined. Their demand for building materials is causing world scrap metal prices to shoot up, to pick just one example. China is a huge country, and developing at a furious pace.

And yes, the resulting pollution is dreadful. A friend of mine is moving to Shanghai next month, and is not looking forward to the perpetual smog.

ittam

ittam

Jamaica
February 2005

DEC 31, 2006 05:28 AM

It is just like it was in New York, Philadelphia, London in the 19th century. It is the normal, tested, way of industrializing a country. The West did it earlier, so we cannot really blame the Chinese - at least as long as we happily buy all goods they produce.

We have outsourced both production and pollution. Now the latter is catching up.

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

DEC 31, 2006 05:34 AM

ittam said:
It is just like it was in New York, Philadelphia, London in the 19th century.



Actually, it was still true in New York as recently as the 1960s - my parents used to find thick deposits of coal-furnace soot on their window ledges.

MetaTag

MetaTag

United Kingdom
September 2002

DEC 31, 2006 05:40 AM

Snorting coke is not good for you.

ninetysevencents

ninetysevencents

Rochester, NY
August 2003

DEC 31, 2006 08:39 AM

Oh, they still have that. Two weeks ago I read this article about a proposed US shift from oil to coal derived fuel for use in transportation. It did not make me happy.

d_day

d_day

San Bernardino, CA
July 2002

DEC 31, 2006 10:15 AM

China uses more coal than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined.



The last time I checked, China has more people than the US, the EU and Japan combined. Their coal consumption would be expected to be more based on that alone.

bedukay

bedukay

Endicott, NY
March 2003

DEC 31, 2006 10:36 AM

ninetysevencents said:
Oh, they still have that. Two weeks ago I read this article about a proposed US shift from oil to coal derived fuel for use in transportation. It did not make me happy.



Why not? According to the article it is a form of bio-diesel that is more environmentally friendly and cheaper than oil plus it can be made here in the US. Which would reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create jobs here. I'm not being facetious I'm honestly curious.

Callahan

Callahan

Seattle, WA
February 2005

DEC 31, 2006 01:54 PM

bedukay said:

ninetysevencents said:
Oh, they still have that. Two weeks ago I read this article about a proposed US shift from oil to coal derived fuel for use in transportation. It did not make me happy.



Why not? According to the article it is a form of bio-diesel that is more environmentally friendly and cheaper than oil plus it can be made here in the US. Which would reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create jobs here. I'm not being facetious I'm honestly curious.



Aside from the expense (now worth it with such high price per barrel) it has no drawbacks not already associated with oil. Plus it reduces our dependence on foriegn oil, could be a boon for many states and bring many dying old coal towns into new prosperity, is cleaner then just burning coal and since we're not importing oil theres no tankers to sink and fuck up our waters.

And on a side note, an inventer came up with and tested a process to convert Turkey guts from the slaughter house into crude oil. And he says he can turn just about anyother carbon based waste into fuel as well. Simply by mimicing the earths own natural geologic process albeit speeded up dramatically. The only downside is that as he's emptying landfills he's also filling the sky. But we're doing that anyway by emptying oil reserves.


Turkey guts to oil

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

DEC 31, 2006 04:32 PM

Callahan said:

And on a side note, an inventer came up with and tested a process to convert Turkey guts from the slaughter house into crude oil. And he says he can turn just about anyother carbon based waste into fuel as well. Simply by mimicing the earths own natural geologic process albeit speeded up dramatically. The only downside is that as he's emptying landfills he's also filling the sky. But we're doing that anyway by emptying oil reserves.


Turkey guts to oil



That's not exactly new; I read about it in a first-year undergrad chemistry text in 1980 or thereabouts. Carbon monoxide and organic waste, at about 20 bar and 600 Centrigrade.

swedrock

swedrock

Louisville, KY
October 2005

DEC 31, 2006 06:14 PM

The clouds of smoke are now reported by airline pilots all the way across the pacific. Estimates of air quality in LA 2 months ago showed that 20% was from across the pacific. This might become an enormous problem for the west coast.

ninetysevencents

ninetysevencents

Rochester, NY
August 2003

JAN 03, 2007 07:03 PM

bedukay said:

ninetysevencents said:
Oh, they still have that. Two weeks ago I read this article about a proposed US shift from oil to coal derived fuel for use in transportation. It did not make me happy.



Why not? According to the article it is a form of bio-diesel that is more environmentally friendly and cheaper than oil plus it can be made here in the US. Which would reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create jobs here. I'm not being facetious I'm honestly curious.



While cleaner the burn, the process of collecting coal is bad news. Strip mining destroys entire landscapes. Also there's that little thing called black lung disease that I wouldn't wish on anyone. And even after paying the price of the Appalachian lands and people, we still would run out of the stuff. It's just as unreliable as oil. What we need to do is focus on clean, renewable energy sources, not modifying old sources to make them a little bit cleaner. That's a dead end.

ninetysevencents

ninetysevencents

Rochester, NY
August 2003

JAN 03, 2007 07:55 PM

ninetysevencents said:
While cleaner the burn,


uh, cleaner to burn (and I was referencing the CTL technology, not raw coal. raw coal is really dirty)

Gringo

Gringo

Spokane, WA
May 2006

JAN 03, 2007 08:09 PM

I know this will seem cold and cruel to many, but I now see why their government has to physically stop the number of babies being born there. Their own over-population will eventually kill the country.

Dunno, maybe they could have a moratorium on childbirth for say....the next 20 years or so?

Stiles

Stiles

Philadelphia, PA
November 2002

JAN 03, 2007 08:16 PM

ninetysevencents said:
And even after paying the price of the Appalachian lands and people, we still would run out of the stuff. It's just as unreliable as oil. What we need to do is focus on clean, renewable energy sources, not modifying old sources to make them a little bit cleaner. That's a dead end.



You have no idea how much coal we have in the US, do you?

About 492,935,000,000 (four hundred thousand nine hundred thirty five million) tons, or 800 years' worth at current consumption rates.

Federal report of US coal reserves by state

Coal is our major source of electric power and the #1 domestically-sourced fuel supply, dwarfing US-produced natural gas and oil.

Like it or not coal is here to stay. US energy consumption is only going up and there is no viable replacement for current or forecasted coal consumption. About all we can hope for is better scrubber technology for coal-fired plants, and vigorous enforcement of environmental and mining safety rules.

The US needs all the energy it can get from every source - nuclear, coal, natural gas, wind, solar, bio and hydro.

Admiral_Pants

Admiral_Pants

Austin, TX
May 2004

JAN 03, 2007 08:28 PM