(This post was originally posted in December 2008, so updated figures appear at the U.S. Energy Information Administration site.)
This is the only blog site that I contribute to. There are a couple of other sites who pick up on my posts with permission, and that is only a recent thing. I also make comments to articles here in my homeland Australia. One of the problems I have is that the figures I come up with are astronomical, and that tends to make them sound like they are unbelievable. I am a perfectionist, and I cannot stand it if something is incorrect, so I like to check the facts. That’s why I always try to find and include backup links, where possible to the main site where I obtain these facts.
I come from a background in the electrical trade where I also taught electrical trade subjects. That was the background that made me question the ramifications of what we are all being asked to believe as an absolute
What that has led me to is to make posts from the point of view of actually believing what is basically ‘spin’. I am not of the belief that we are contributing to Anthropogenic Global Warming, or Climate Change as it is now being called. I do believe that we have made a contribution, but on a level nothing like what those rabid environmentalists believe, and that what we do down here on the surface is not having the result that we are being told about in such a scary way. I also dispute that the emissions of Carbon Dioxide are the cause of this Global Warming/Climate Change.
What I have tried to achieve is to explain that if we are to believe the worst of it, then what will those results be, and what will we have to do if we are to significantly change things.
Because of that, the numbers that do I write about in my posts are in fact, astronomical. Directly because of that, when I do make comments at some of the news releases here in Australia, I am discounted because those people who are well intentioned have no understanding of what I am trying to say.
There are two things especially that people find difficult to wrap their heads around. The first is the actual amount of coal being burned by those large plants, and the second is the perceived anomaly of how much Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is produced from the burning of that coal.
Some people who reply to a comment I have made dismiss out of hand the amount of coal burned at these large plants, because it just sounds like it is so much.
For those really large coal fired plants, they will burn more than 10,000 tons of coal each day, and on hot days where there is high demand, they can burn as much as 15,000 tons per day or more. I have always used the Bruce Mansfield Plant in Pennsylvania, (Pdf document) not because they burn more than any other plant, but because I like to keep a constant point as a referral. Bruce Mansfield burns on average around the same as for all of those large coal fired plants, and Bruce Mansfield burns around 7 Million tons of coal each and every year. That averages out to nearly 19,000 tons per day, so the figures I actually show in my posts are conservative to say the least. The US produces just a fraction under half its total consumed power from these coal fired means, and to do that, they burn 1.08 Billion tons of coal every year. That is why it sounds so unbelievable, because that number sounds so high.
This is the link to the website that shows just that figure.
When you arrive at the page, the heading for the table says Table 2.1.C Coal … (etc) and at the end of the text there, in brackets it says (Thousand Tons).
The left hand column alongside the year numbers is for the Total for all sectors.
Scroll right to the bottom of that column and alongside 2008 is the number 1,076,810. That is thousand tons of coal burned, or rounded out, 1.08 Billion tons of coal burned each year.
Recently I have had two replies to comments I have made for the amount of CO2 produced from the burning of coal. I said that for each ton of coal burned, it produces 2.86 Tons of CO2. What I said was discredited because people just cannot understand how that actually happens.
Remember back to when you were a child and were asked at school ….. “What is heavier? One ton of lead or one ton of feathers.” The automatic belief is that feathers are lighter, so the ‘feathers’ was the answer you gave. However, the weight of both is the same. One ton.
The same applies here in this case. You have one ton of a heavy solid, that being coal. You have a gas, CO2, so how can a solid weighing one ton produce a gas weighing 2.86 tons. It sounds incongruous, and because of that, is easily disbelieved. If that gas were able to be compressed to a solid, it would weigh 2.86 tons, but just because people know that a gas is so light that it just wafts away, the impression is that the amounts are different, but in actual fact it is the weight that is the important factor here.
This was always something that concerned me as well. So, what I had to do was to then go and find actual written proof of this perceived anomaly.
This is the link to the page that explains this.
When you arrive at the page, scroll down to the heading ‘Coal Combustion And Carbon Dioxide Emissions’. It sounds technical, but is relatively easy to understand, and the third paragraph best explains it.
Remember back to High School Science when you learned the first few atoms in the periodic table of elements. Both Carbon and Oxygen are relatively close together on that table, so each atom ‘weighs’ approximately the same, so combining that one atom of Carbon with two atoms of Oxygen virtually triples the weight of the original Carbon atom.
Basically, coal is just compressed Carbon with other elements that go to make up the overall content. As the coal is burned, those Carbon atoms combine with 2 Oxygen atoms from the air during the burning process. The resultant compound, the gas CO2 is made up of every Carbon atom in the coal, which then combines with 2 Oxygen atoms, so the resultant is actually heavier than the Carbon content of the coal itself, hence the anomaly of the gas weighing heavier than the solid lump of coal.
That is why each ton of coal produces 2.86 tons of the gas CO2. Anthracite coal, (brown coal) produces even more CO2, in fact one third as much again, but most of the coal burned in the US is the steaming coal, Lignite, both bituminous and sub bituminous.
That is why there is the perceived anomaly that is so easily disbelieved.
When taken in context with the amount of coal burned in the US to produce electrical power, then the amount of CO2 produced amounts to 3.1 Billion tons of CO2. When added to the amount produced from the natural gas plants as well, that figure approaches 4 Billion tons.
Now, the US produces one quarter of all the World’s power, and just under 50% comes from coal fired sources. For the rest of the World, the figures from the coal fired source amount to nearly 85%, and the only reason that the whole World total is at 78% is that the US brings that figure lower.
At 85%, the rest of the World emits nearly 30 Billion tons of CO2, and that is just from the coal fired sector alone. When added to the US figure and the other sources of electrical power are taken into consideration, the number approaches 45 Billion tons of CO2 emitted from all power plants on the Planet.
Electrical power generation makes up just under 30% of the total CO2 emissions, so the total CO2 emitted on Planet Earth each year is around 150 Billion tons. Keep in mind this is a conservative amount only. Some sources have it as little as 50 Billion tons and some have it much higher again than that 150 Billion tons.
It’s easy sometimes to get confused with percentages for this next bit. Nitrogen makes up 76.55% of the total Atmosphere. Oxygen makes up 20.54%, and the Greenhouse Gases make up 2% of the overall Atmosphere.
The amount of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere is a known amount. The largest of the Greenhouse gases is water vapor (suspended water mainly in clouds) and this comprises 98% of the total Greenhouse gases. (98% of that 2% total) CO2 is the next largest Greenhouse gas, and that makes up 1.98% of the total Greenhouse gases. (1.98% of that 2% total) The other 0.21% of greenhouse gases is made up of methane and other trace gases. The total CO2 content currently in the Earth’s atmosphere amounts to 385 Parts per million, (or 0.0385% of the overall total Atmosphere), and this amount has changed very little since the end of the Second World War. So look again at the figure for the amount of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere for the last 60 and more years and then see how really insignificant amount that huge figure really is.
Now perhaps you see just how astronomical these figures really are, and in reality, how insignificant they really are at the same time.
So now when you see that one ton of solid coal produces 2.86 tons of a wafting gas that just floats away, be aware that the weight is really what you are looking at, and that one ton of coal really does produce 2.86 tons of CO2.
POST SCRIPT As this was originally posted in December 2008, and the figures shown at those stat pages have changed slightly since that time, as has the overall CO2 content in the Atmosphere, now at 388PPM, still only 0.0388% of that overall Atmosphere.
POST SCRIPT 2 (24OCT2012)
In reply to a Comment below from pablomayrgundter, I have added the following image that shows historical levels of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere throughout Earth’s History.
There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example:
During the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today.
The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm — about 18 times higher than today.
The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today– 4400 ppm.
According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration influence earth temperatures and global warming.





Butch Wheldon
Thu 07/19/2012
You are also incorrect on how much C02 has changed since the “second World War”. We are now at nearly 400 ppm, a figure that has steadily increased throughout the Industrial age, and especially since WWII.
We now know that Earth’s climate is FAR more sensitive then we thought. Climate emissions are the driving causes, with the evidence absolutely everywhere you look (glacial melt, sea ice disappearance, torrential rain, drought, major floods, extreme storms and many more).
Your alleged “refusal to believe” is based on a lack of understanding and scientific facts. Climate sensitivity to human contribution is much more then you have assumed, as the last two decades have shown.
The latest data indicates we are going to lose Arctic sea ice by 2015, changing the albedo effect over the Artic ocean (and land, since melt is very rapidly occurring there too). This will contribute over 3.4 watts of additional solar radiation to the Earth’s surface, amplifying positive feedbacks.
This is but one of the major flaws in your “disbelief”. The factual, measureable and scientific evidence is readily available to directly contradict your “belief” (a stupid position to take, belief has nothing to do with facts).
Your entire position is based on “tiny percentages”, yet you fail to realize that it only takes a tiny percentage to create massive levels of change to the planetary atmosphere and climate feedbacks.
Your assumptions are not scientific whatsoever, they border on “faith” in your “assumptions” and are in fact, dead wrong. Pumping hundreds of billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere is quite obviously having major effects upon our climate. Ignore this fact at your own peril.
TonyfromOz
Thu 07/19/2012
Butch,
thanks for taking the time to comment.
This Post has been at our site for almost four years now, and is one of our most visited Posts, because not many people are actually aware of this fact, or indeed of the scale of those CO2 emissions, or in fact, of where the vast bulk of them come from.
The Atmospheric CO2 content was correct at the time of writing, and is now 393PPM.
I have been contributing Posts here at this site for more than four years now, mainly on these subjects, and I have around 800 or so Posts on this and those related matters, so this is not just a ‘one off’ Post without any thought behind it.
All of those Posts have been researched from a number of sources, both pro and con, and I am just one of many opinions on this matter.
As much as you say that my ‘beliefs’ are based on faith, then the same can also be said for your beliefs as well. We both have our opinions, and in all reality, all opinions need to be heard, and also addressed, something that does not happen.
Your Sea Ice factoid is one that has been debunked over the years, and that ‘Arctic Ice Free’ time has blown out each time it is mentioned. Even if the Ice does melt, and it has before, then it will not raise sea levels as it is sea ice, ice that is already floating in the surrounding water.
With respect to the current CO2 level of 393PPM, numerous times in the history of the Earth, those CO2 levels have been higher, and in fact considerably higher. During the last Ice Age in fact the Atmospheric CO2 content was 4,400PPM, which is 11 times higher than it is today. That CO2 content has been as high as 7,000PPM. So the fact that the current level might lead to runaway Global Warming needs to be taken in context with those earlier times when it did not happen. That level of 393PPM is in fact close to the lowest levels of CO2 our Earth has ever had in its Atmosphere.
I am also wondering why, if the problem is so dire, as we are being told, then something is not being done about instead of just talk. By far the largest proportion of those CO2 emissions come from the the electrical power generation sector, mainly coal fired power, and these make up around 40% of all man made emissions. If the position is so dire, why are they not doing something to stem this possible catastrophe that is supposedly CAGW and immediately closing down the largest source of those emissions, those large scale coal fired power plants.
In fact, in the last now more than four years I have been contributing here, and watching this, not one large scale plant has been closed in the U.S. and you may wish to read this Post about just that fact.
Climate Change – The Canary In The Coal Mine
Also, in China they are bringing on line one new large scale coal fired power plant each week, and have been doing this for the last four to five years. The same is happening in India, although there, it is on a slightly slower scale. Elsewhere around the World, those new coal fired plants are being constructed at an ever increasing rate.
If this CAGW problem was as dire as you seem to think it is, then all energies on a World wide basis would be directed towards stopping those emissions, and in fact the opposite is happening.
So, while you say I have a ‘belief’ you also have a belief. You say you are right, and I say let both sides be heard, because, patently, that is not happening.
Oh, and Butch, where you say here:
Before you jump on the moral high ground of Science, it’s Carbon Dioxide being (in your words) pumped into the Atmosphere.
Again, thanks for stopping by to leave a comment.
Tony
pablomayrgundter
Tue 10/23/2012
Hey Tony,
Thanks for bringing math to the debate
Overall, your numbers for how much coal we burn sounds right to me after reading books and the US EIA site extensively.
However, I think your prehistoric data is incorrect. What’s the source for your claim that CO2 levels in previous ice ages reached up to 4,400 ppm? The last time that happened is hundreds of millions of years ago, back in the golden age of the dinosaurs!
Wikipedia has a graphs to back this up, showing CO2 levels for the previous 400,000 years (which spans 4 ice ages) based on ice core samples (and another ensemble going further back):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png
That shows CO2 cycling between 180 to 300 ppm during the 400,000 year time period, except of course for the recent rise to 400 ppm in the last 100 years.
The main, blue part of the graph is based on an article published in Science in 1999 describing the ice core examination:
“Fischer, H., M. Wahlen, J. Smith, D. Mastroianni, and B. Deck (1999). “Ice core records of Atmospheric CO2 around the last three glacial terminations”. Science 283: 1712-1714.”
Full Text here:
http://epic.awi.de/825/1/Fis1999a.pdf
pablomayrgundter
Tue 10/23/2012
Please reply to this second comment, if you do, so I can be notified by email (forgot to check the box).
TonyfromOz
Tue 10/23/2012
pablomayrgundter,
thanks for taking the time to leave a comment.
As you may know, the Wikipedia site can be very selective with the information it posts.
The Earth’s history dates a lot longer than the 400,000 years you have used here.
As you can see from this image I have now added to the main body of the Post itself, those levels of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the Atmosphere have indeed been higher.
There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example:
During the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today.
The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm — about 18 times higher than today.
The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today– 4400 ppm.
According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration influence earth temperatures and global warming.
Again thanks for taking the time to add a comment.
Tony.