Not sure if some understand what they are proposing.
The world is totally reliant on electricity
Think about it. Everything we do requires electricity somewhere in the system.
Put simply, "electricity" is just a means of transporting ENERGY from a source, to the point where it is used. Stored energy in the coal is released in the power station, transported along a wire as electicty, and then used.
So now a bit of very basic physics/chemistry, which cannot be changed.
Except for nuclear energy from Einsteins E= MC2, where mass is converted into energy, it cannot be "created" by man.
Our energy is ultimately from the sun, which is itself a nuclear reactor.
The suns energy is harnessed by man in the following scenarios:
1/Fossil fuels (plants) These plants were originally created by photosynthesis. That is, extracing carbon from the Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere...(seperating the carbon and oxygen in CO2) The energy suppled by the sun when this chemical process occurs, is "stored" in the plant and released as heat when the the chemical process is reversed and carbon is recombined with oxygen to produce CO2 (ie burning the fossil fuel)This heat is used to make steam to drive turbines to generate the electicity. (Or the fossil fue is refined and used in internal combustion engines)
2/Wind energy. Wind is caused by heating and cooling of the atmosphere by the sun. Wind also causes waves which can be harnessed for electicity generation.
3/Hydro power The water is raised fro sea level to higher levels in rivers and dams by heat from the sun causing evaporation.
4/Bio fuels ( see point 1 )
5/ Solar powered cells Once again using the theromnuclear energy of the sun. Despite the massive nuclear power being generated by the sun, the amount of energy available from a square metre of solar panel is finite. It cannot be more than 100 % of the the power delivered, and on a square metre it is miniscule. Huge solar panels..... impractical, could never generate base load power.... and unreliable continuity of supply.
Ditto for wind, wave and hydro.
Electicity cannot stored as such. It can be used to drive chemical reactions in batteries and hydrogen cells. These reactions can be reversed at a later date to generate electricity. Both very very costly,.... batteries themselves not environmentally friendy and hydrogen gas potentially highly explosive. And even with massive facilties, we could still only store a miniscusle amount of the power required at any one time.
Geothemal power may be of some value for some power generation, but not in the short to mid term and never with the ability to generate even a fraction the power we require nationally or globally.
Biofuel can be grown, but again at what cost with the use of water and land which may otherwise be used to produce food. Again, its contribution would be miniscule.
It is an immutable fact that we cannot generate reliable and sufficient power (or store power) from any of these methods to replace the burning of fossil fuels.... unless we go nuclear.
China is starting up a new coal fired power station on average every 6 days for the next 10 years. Dont know the figures fo India, but their demand for power would be similar And then there is the rest of the developing world who need electricicy to raise their living standard. Even for basic things like refrigeration, water purification ...normal health and hygine.
So it is an absolute and unavoidable fact that the world as a whole needs to generate increasing amounts of electricity. On a world scale, none of this can be done without coal fired or nuclear power stations.
Locally, I fail to see that by charging more for electricity by way of "carbon tax " how anything will change, except that ultimately everyone, including those that can least afford it, will pay more for everything.
In the light of the above and given our 500 years plus of brown coal supplies to generate our power, it is an exercise in absolute futility and madness on our part to even consider closing ours down.
