<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Claverton Group &#187; Coal fired</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.claverton-energy.com/tag/coal/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com</link>
	<description>Elite Energy, Environment &#38; Tranporation Experts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:55:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Chris Hodrien comments on key recent ‘maverick’ studies downgrading coal reserves estimates</title>
		<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com/chris-hodrien-comments-on-key-recent-%e2%80%98maverick%e2%80%99-studies-downgrading-coal-reserves-estimates.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.claverton-energy.com/chris-hodrien-comments-on-key-recent-%e2%80%98maverick%e2%80%99-studies-downgrading-coal-reserves-estimates.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 18:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Coal fired]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peak coal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.claverton-energy.com/?p=3479</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Comments from Chris Hodrien on &#8220;Peak Coal&#8221; article &#8211; R Heinberg 21may07 (Energy Bulletin- Online Opinion.com Fred et al, I guess that this paper, reporting [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.claverton-energy.com/chris-hodrien-comments-on-key-recent-%e2%80%98maverick%e2%80%99-studies-downgrading-coal-reserves-estimates.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Little known (or conveniently forgotten) reason for 1926 miners strike recalled &#8211; Dr Fred Starr</title>
		<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com/little-known-or-conveniently-forgotten-reason-for-1926-miners-strike-recalled-dr-fred-starr.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.claverton-energy.com/little-known-or-conveniently-forgotten-reason-for-1926-miners-strike-recalled-dr-fred-starr.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dr Fred Starr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Coal fired]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electricity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steam engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.claverton-energy.com/?p=2563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If no one has anything better, here is a slightly incomplete table for coal production. This has been compiled from various sources over the past few years.

Peak was 1913 when we were exporting 100 million tons at a price of around £1 per ton. This might be equivalent to £50 per ton today (or higher?).

UK coal exports began to get uncompetitive after WWI, and was one of the main reasons for the 1926 General Strike, when the coal owners wanted to reduce wages.

Coal output was insufficient in WWII (and afterwards) and was one reason for sending one in every ten

conscripted men down the mines

UK coal reserves are now given as somewhere between 400-800 million tonnes. Not the billions that everyone supposes.

If the UK energy system was totally dependent on coal, as it used to be, these would last 2-4 years.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.claverton-energy.com/little-known-or-conveniently-forgotten-reason-for-1926-miners-strike-recalled-dr-fred-starr.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;would it be practical to store syngas as a method of allowing IGCC-CCS plants to respond to the overnight fall in demand?&#8221; Fred Starr responds</title>
		<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com/would-it-be-practical.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.claverton-energy.com/would-it-be-practical.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dr Fred Starr</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capture & Storage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2 levels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coal fired]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hydrogen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Power stations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IGCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IGCC plus CCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[load following]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Storage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[syngas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.claverton-energy.com/?p=2673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Claverton Hydrogen Storage on IGCC Sites

Dear Neil

You asked if it would be practical to store syngas as a method of allowing IGCC-CCS plants to respond to the overnight fall in demand

The prospects of the on-site storage of syngas, to enable an IGCC to vary its output seem limited. The gas that would have to be stored would have to be hydrogen. Otherwise, the processes by which the carbon in the syngas is removed would have continuously vary their throughput. Only the gasifier and air separation unit ( for supply of oxygen) would run at a constant output

Unfortunately, a very large amount of gas is produced when gasifying 
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.claverton-energy.com/would-it-be-practical.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The problem with CCS Carbon Capture and Storage</title>
		<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com/1699.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.claverton-energy.com/1699.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capture & Storage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coal fired]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.claverton-energy.com/?p=1699</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.claverton-energy.com/1699.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DECC Updates Its Generation Cost Database, But Misses the Cheapest &#8211; CHP DH and Micro CHP</title>
		<link>http://www.claverton-energy.com/decc-updates-its-generation-cost-database-but-misses-the-cheapest-chp-dh-and-micro-chp.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.claverton-energy.com/decc-updates-its-generation-cost-database-but-misses-the-cheapest-chp-dh-and-micro-chp.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:47:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Electricity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wind Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative energy sources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biofuels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capture CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coal fired]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conventional IGCCs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Generation of Electricity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IGCC plus CCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Micro-generation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microgeneration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power generation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[renewable electricity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[renewable energy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.claverton-energy.com/?p=1539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) had a meeting to discuss the generation costs of energy technologies in November last year. This exercise [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.claverton-energy.com/decc-updates-its-generation-cost-database-but-misses-the-cheapest-chp-dh-and-micro-chp.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

