To note that our modern society is energy-hungry is not only a massive understatement but an exercise in belaboring the obvious. Everything about our modern technological lifestyle requires energy and plenty of it, and cheap, reliable energy is one of the best (along with free markets) guarantors of a prosperous society. While "green energy" advocates still shout for the need for wind and solar power, the most reliable, efficient, and yes, cheapest energy in the United States is generated by fossil fuels - coal and natural gas - and by nuclear power. //

But given advancements in coal-burning technology, and also given that the United States is sitting on mountains of coal, there are good arguments for the continued use of coal. //

the U.S. led early with a leadoff home run. It invented, developed and perfected the first ultra-super critical (USC) coal-powered plant.

Coming online in 2012, the 600-megawatt (MW) John W. Turk Jr. Coal Plant in Arkansas employed new technology, most notably, an advance in metallurgy that allowed pipes and boilers to operate for extended periods at extremely elevated temperature and pressure.

This higher temperature allows efficiency of 40%, instead of the more usual 33%. Also, Turk had the best pollution controls, its emissions being mostly carbon dioxide and water vapor. Power Magazine was so impressed that it gave the plant its highest honor in 2013. //

Having improved on USC technology, Chinese plant efficiency is around 44%. The new 1,350 MW Pingshan Phase II plant achieves 49% efficiency! The best Chinese coal plant is now cleaner and 22 % more efficient than its American counterpart.

Since 2010, India has constructed more than 90 super critical and ultra-super critical coal plants.
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/energy/budget-2024-25-ntpc-bhel-to-set-up-a-hi-tech-coal-power-plant-how-will-it-work

mopani Ed in North Texas
6 minutes ago
The only reason I am not a fan of coal for electric power is that it takes 100 rail cars per day to feed a 1GW power plant. Half the rail traffic in the USA is coal. If we could cut half the rail traffic it would save a lot of lives lost at rail crossings. Its simple statistics: in a lot of areas in the Midwest, there's an at-grade crossing nearly every mile.

A similar size pressurized water nuclear power plant only needs 35 tons of uranium per YEAR, and requires mining about 200 tons of uranium ore to produce. And the used nuclear fuel is the only waste product that gets safer with time, unlike every other pollutant.

https://www.daretothink.org/how-big-is-that-thorium-ball/

If we would build the molten salt reactor that Jimmy "I pretend to be a nuclear engineer" Carter killed, or the breeder reactor that Bill "sold to the highest bidder" Clinton killed so thoroughly, Nuclear power would only need 1 ton of fuel per YEAR. Versus 100 rail cars per DAY for coal.

I would rather build coal than depend on "sunshine, summer breezes, fumaroles, and chicken manure" for reliable electricity (Petr Beckman), but nuclear is better.