Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bonds, Currencies, Commodities and Index Futures -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Adams who wrote (2151)	7/25/2001 11:57:41 PM
From: Moominoid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12411

I was under the impression that NatGas was preferred over coal due to the higher energy content per unit of carbon. I think that's right - I'd have to look up the conversion factors though. I knew more about the detailed energy calculations of these reactions in the past (when I did chemistry in High School in England!) than I do currently. Obviously something I'd need to study up on if I got that job. My point was that if you don't oxidize the carbon part as well you lose a lot of the energy content. The main beneifts of nat gas though are it is easier and more flexible to use (but harder to transport long distances), burns cleaner, has less greenhouse potential. David