Thai Govt Open To Talks After 8 Faint In Anti-Coal Hunger Strike

[webfact]

Govt Open To Talks After 8 Faint In Anti-Coal Hunger Strike

By Teeranai Charuvastra, Staff Reporter

 

Anti-coal campaigners take a hunger striker away from the protest in front of the U.N. office in Bangkok

 

BANGKOK — The government said Thursday it is open to direct talks with hunger strikers opposed to the construction of coal-fired power plants in the south.

 

Speaking a day after eight strikers were hospitalized after fainting in front of the United Nations headquarters in Bangkok, Lt. Gen. Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Thursday that prime minister and junta chairman Prayuth Chan-ocha is aware of what happened and “worried” for the protesters’ well-being.

 

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2018/02/15/govt-open-talks-8-faint-anti-coal-hunger-strike/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2018-02-16

[jpduggan]

The  After Eights 

[rkidlad]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Prayuth Chan-ocha is aware of what happened and “worried” for the protesters’ well-being

Really pulls at the old heartstrings, doesn't it. 

[baboon]

'Open to talks' - Restate policy, pretend to listen to objectors, restate the exact same policy with a slightly different wording, blame objectors for being unreasonable. 

Not just here, but everywhere.

Edited February 16, 2018 by baboon

[cornishcarlos]

They hadn't eaten for 1 hour 45mins, which was verging on the critical time frame for Thai metabolism...

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, baboon said:

'Open to talks' - Restate policy, pretend to listen to objectors, restate the exact same policy with a slightly different wording, blame objectors for being unreasonable. 

Not just here, but everywhere.

True... but how would you do it... solar and wind energy are still not good enough and would drive up cost (then you get protests about that) There are some (relatively) clean coal energy centrals. But it seems as if the Southern people want the plants to be build up north and let them suffer instead of accepting that they too use energy that has to be produced somewhere. 

[YetAnother]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

The government said Thursday it is open to direct talks

well, there is hearing and Listening;

betting their gesture is a superficial publicity op

[bluesofa]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

True... but how would you do it... solar and wind energy are still not good enough and would drive up cost (then you get protests about that)

 

Is that correct?

I have no details of the capacity of the proposed coal-fired power station, against the size/cost for an equivalent solar/wind power station. Be interesting to know.

[robblok]

44 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

 

Is that correct?

I have no details of the capacity of the proposed coal-fired power station, against the size/cost for an equivalent solar/wind power station. Be interesting to know.

As far as I know its still not viable.. do remember that solar power dies down at night and that is when many of the aircons in homes get turned on. So you need power for that. If solar was as cheap as coal fired it would be used for sure. I am all for renewable energy (though hoping that they soon find a way to do nuclear fission) but I do know that the current alternatives still don't beat the coal fired plants. 

 

Don't you think that if solar was cheaper the ones against the power plants would have shown that it was cheaper already. Solar is making huge steps forward.. who knows in the future... but right now still not. 

[billd766]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

As far as I know its still not viable.. do remember that solar power dies down at night and that is when many of the aircons in homes get turned on. So you need power for that. If solar was as cheap as coal fired it would be used for sure. I am all for renewable energy (though hoping that they soon find a way to do nuclear fission) but I do know that the current alternatives still don't beat the coal fired plants. 

 

Don't you think that if solar was cheaper the ones against the power plants would have shown that it was cheaper already. Solar is making huge steps forward.. who knows in the future... but right now still not. 

 

AFAIK solar power is used to keep batteries charged up as storage and the power is taken from the batteries.

 

My apologies. This was for a wind powered installation

 

The Tesla Powerpacks have now been fully installed at a wind farm run by France’s Neoen, and testing is set to begin to provide grid security services in South Australia.

 

Tesla built the worlds biggest storage battery in the world at Hornsdale, South Australia last year.

 

Tesla won a bid in July to build the 129 megawatt hour battery for South Australia, the country’s most wind power-dependent state, with a vow from Chief Executive Elon Musk to install it within 100 days of signing a grid connection agreement or give it to the state for free.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-power-tesla/tesla-cranks-up-big-battery-in-australia-idUSKBN1DN0B4

 

I can't see much difference between wind and solar power for charging batteries.

 

 

[robblok]

14 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

AFAIK solar power is used to keep batteries charged up as storage and the power is taken from the batteries.

 

My apologies. This was for a wind powered installation

 

The Tesla Powerpacks have now been fully installed at a wind farm run by France’s Neoen, and testing is set to begin to provide grid security services in South Australia.

 

Tesla built the worlds biggest storage battery in the world at Hornsdale, South Australia last year.

 

Tesla won a bid in July to build the 129 megawatt hour battery for South Australia, the country’s most wind power-dependent state, with a vow from Chief Executive Elon Musk to install it within 100 days of signing a grid connection agreement or give it to the state for free.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-power-tesla/tesla-cranks-up-big-battery-in-australia-idUSKBN1DN0B4

 

I can't see much difference between wind and solar power for charging batteries.

 

 

Yes of course you use batteries to store energy... but that means you need a powerplant that has double capacity of that of a coal fired plant. Because you only (for the sake of keeping things easy for calculation there might be more daylight hours) have 12 hours in witch to acquire the same amount of power the coal fired plant does in 24 hours (no need to stop but the sun does go under). So the scale of a solar power plant would have to be much bigger and more costly. 

 

The things your quoting are all nice but are still experimental, lets face it its still not yet mature enough to compete with fossil fuels. I wish it was believe me I am all for green things. Though I still think the future is nuclear fusion. But in a few years there might be plants that are good enough to compete with fossil fuels (we can only hope). Right now I still doubt it.

 

Do you think people are willing to pay a lot extra for their power here in Thailand ? IMHO i don't think so. 

 

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by robblok

[robblok]

We in the Netherlands have a lot of wind energy but we still need extra capacity from stuff like coal fired plants because wind (we got a lot of it in the Netherlands) still is not reliable enough. The output varies a lot and that has to be taken into account because if the amount produced drops you might get blackouts if you don't have backups. So you would always need extra power plants or larger power plants then the normal coal fired plants. That just cost extra money. Not everyone is willing to pay extra for that especially here in Thailand with a lot of poor people. 

[billd766]

9 minutes ago, robblok said:

We in the Netherlands have a lot of wind energy but we still need extra capacity from stuff like coal fired plants because wind (we got a lot of it in the Netherlands) still is not reliable enough. The output varies a lot and that has to be taken into account because if the amount produced drops you might get blackouts if you don't have backups. So you would always need extra power plants or larger power plants then the normal coal fired plants. That just cost extra money. Not everyone is willing to pay extra for that especially here in Thailand with a lot of poor people. 

 

However if you compare the cost of coal (there is no really clean coal) with the cost of the wind and the sun there is a big difference.

 

Plus you have to buy/import the coal, deliver to the power station, take away and dispose of the ash, make sure that the scrubbers in the chimney stacks are cleaned and replaced regularly.

 

OTOH with a battery back up the batteries will need replacing every few years and they won't come cheap, though recycling should give a reasonable return value.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

However if you compare the cost of coal (there is no really clean coal) with the cost of the wind and the sun there is a big difference.

 

Plus you have to buy/import the coal, deliver to the power station, take away and dispose of the ash, make sure that the scrubbers in the chimney stacks are cleaned and replaced regularly.

 

OTOH with a battery back up the batteries will need replacing every few years and they won't come cheap, though recycling should give a reasonable return value.

Yes true you don't have to buy anything if you run on wind or solar, but you do need to build something that is a lot bigger (to have over capacity for the time there is no wind or sun) then a coal plant. So the construction costs would certainly differ a lot so depreciation on that would be the main difference. Now you have to offset that to the price of coal. 

 

I don't know how long those solar panels keep producing vs how long a coal plant keeps producing but i got a feeling a coal fired plant can keep on going longer then those panels. 

 

I am sure much smarter people than us have done those calculations and found that its still not feasible. Countries like Germany and Netherlands are investing a lot in alternative energy but they still hang on to coal fired plants too. There is a good reason for that its cost and reliability. 

 

Don't get me wrong here, in future things might change and renewable energy might be cheaper but not yet. I really hold out for nuclear fission (unlimited energy with almost no waste) They got test projects in Japan and France for that.  

 

Lets just hope that technology advances quickly and I am proven wrong (i would love to be wrong here). 

[bluesofa]

Can I make a point of thanking robblok and billd766 for your rational and informative posts on this subject.

 

I'm also keen the green option, so as well as being very interesting for me, it was a good discussion to follow without the all-too-frequent slide into petty arguing we so often see.

Thanks again both of you.

 

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Can I make a point of thanking robblok and billd766 for your rational and informative posts on this subject.

 

I'm also keen the green option, so as well as being very interesting for me, it was a good discussion to follow without the all-too-frequent slide into petty arguing we so often see.

Thanks again both of you.

 

Just out of curiousity how much extra in % would you be willing to pay to have green energy instead of coal fired. In the Netherlands there was a time (not sure if it still happens as I have been gone for 10 years) where you could choose for green or normal energy the green energy was more expensive. It was not a huge success. 

[bluesofa]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Just out of curiousity how much extra in % would you be willing to pay to have green energy instead of coal fired. In the Netherlands there was a time (not sure if it still happens as I have been gone for 10 years) where you could choose for green or normal energy the green energy was more expensive. It was not a huge success. 

Being honest about it I would say 5%. But having said that, I would want some sort of reassurance that's what I was getting.

I'm guessing it works the same as I've read it works in the UK? You can choose your electricity supplier there, but all the suppliers must be feeding into the national grid, then having to account for where they're selling it on?

 

Here, I'm so cynical of scams, that, if for example, a green supplier was feeding 20Gw into the system, how could I be sure that they weren't over-selling 30Gw? Making me in effect paying 5% more for traditionally generated power? Seems like a cheating accountants dream come true.

 

[robblok]

1 minute ago, bluesofa said:

Being honest about it I would say 5%. But having said that, I would want some sort of reassurance that's what I was getting.

I'm guessing it works the same as I've read it works in the UK? You can choose your electricity supplier there, but all the suppliers must be feeding into the national grid, then having to account for where they're selling it on?

 

Here, I'm so cynical of scams, that, if for example, a green supplier was feeding 20Gw into the system, how could I be sure that they weren't over-selling 30Gw? Making me in effect paying 5% more for traditionally generated power? Seems like a cheating accountants dream come true.

 

Agreed it should be checked a lot and 5% would be fine for me too 

[billd766]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

Yes true you don't have to buy anything if you run on wind or solar, but you do need to build something that is a lot bigger (to have over capacity for the time there is no wind or sun) then a coal plant. So the construction costs would certainly differ a lot so depreciation on that would be the main difference. Now you have to offset that to the price of coal. 

 

I don't know how long those solar panels keep producing vs how long a coal plant keeps producing but i got a feeling a coal fired plant can keep on going longer then those panels. 

 

I am sure much smarter people than us have done those calculations and found that its still not feasible. Countries like Germany and Netherlands are investing a lot in alternative energy but they still hang on to coal fired plants too. There is a good reason for that its cost and reliability. 

 

Don't get me wrong here, in future things might change and renewable energy might be cheaper but not yet. I really hold out for nuclear fission (unlimited energy with almost no waste) They got test projects in Japan and France for that.  

 

Lets just hope that technology advances quickly and I am proven wrong (i would love to be wrong here). 

 

From what I can remember normal household solar panels have a working life of about 10 years IF they are properly maintained. There are some old airfields in eastern England that are used as solar energy fields and quite a few offshore wind farms too. There are problems with the pc and beautiful England crowds trying to stop them being built but the UL now has almost no coal fired power stations and relies on gas and nuclear power.

 

The coal mining industry has virtually vanished from the UK which is a good thing from the pollution point of view bad bad from the emplyment side.

[billd766]

5 hours ago, bluesofa said:

Being honest about it I would say 5%. But having said that, I would want some sort of reassurance that's what I was getting.

I'm guessing it works the same as I've read it works in the UK? You can choose your electricity supplier there, but all the suppliers must be feeding into the national grid, then having to account for where they're selling it on?

 

Here, I'm so cynical of scams, that, if for example, a green supplier was feeding 20Gw into the system, how could I be sure that they weren't over-selling 30Gw? Making me in effect paying 5% more for traditionally generated power? Seems like a cheating accountants dream come true.

 

 

The problem as far as I can see is that you really have no idea where the electricity that you use really comes from.

 

For example if in the south of the UK you but your electricity from Scottish power and one neighgour buys from Welsh electricity and another from a French electricity company you will all get exactly the same electricity from the same source at different prices. No electricity company will run separate power cable to your house simply because of the cost and if in 5 years time you decide to buy from a different supplier they won't come along, rip out the cables and put in a new source.

 

IMHO it is somewhat of a con trick with some companies making more money than others by providing power from a single source, ie the National grid.

 

If you have a power failure to your house in southern England and are billed by a Scottish or French company then will they send engineers from Glasgow or Paris to fix it?

 

I know this is an extreme example and probably a silly one but IMHO it could be true.

[robblok]

9 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

The problem as far as I can see is that you really have no idea where the electricity that you use really comes from.

 

For example if in the south of the UK you but your electricity from Scottish power and one neighgour buys from Welsh electricity and another from a French electricity company you will all get exactly the same electricity from the same source at different prices. No electricity company will run separate power cable to your house simply because of the cost and if in 5 years time you decide to buy from a different supplier they won't come along, rip out the cables and put in a new source.

 

IMHO it is somewhat of a con trick with some companies making more money than others by providing power from a single source, ie the National grid.

 

If you have a power failure to your house in southern England and are billed by a Scottish or French company then will they send engineers from Glasgow or Paris to fix it?

 

I know this is an extreme example and probably a silly one but IMHO it could be true.

Just have to check how much green electricity is generated by a company and how much is sold. It does not need to be on a separate power grid. If company A is generating 100.000 MW green energy and selling 110.000 MW they are cheating. 

 

Now what I am saying sounds simple but I am sure figures can be fiddled with (I am an accountant I know). Still an independent organisation could check it.