[strictnein]

I'm glad we're leaving a lot of coal in the ground, but for different reasons. If society as a whole ever slides backwards (due to global war, horrific disease, etc), it leaves a lot of fairly easily extractable energy for the future generation that survives. Dark way of looking at it, I know.

[lettergram]

There are actually things like peat moss[1], which are a semi-renewable energy, which I see being far more useful in a "dark age" scenario.

Not to say, it's not good to keep coal in the ground for the same reason. Just thought I would share another tid-bit lol

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphagnum

[hannob]

peat extraction is extremely harmful to the environment due to large amounts of carbondioxide and methane released by the extraction process. Calling it "semi-renewable" is highly misleading. It's a really destructive source of energy.

(As far as I'm aware most peat extraction happens not for energy usage, but for gardening and agricultural use - but the harm is the same.)

[lettergram]

There are peat moss power plants in Ireland.

I agree it's destructive, but it is actually classified as semi-renewable because it takes "only" a thousand years or so to develop (where oil is millions). In the case at hand, we were discussing a "dark ages" scenario where we end up regressing a bit. I was just bringing up that there are alternatives to coal (also destructive).

FYI peat covers approximately 2% of the earths surface, and around 7% of it is used in agriculture, gardening, and energy[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peat

[derefr]

If we only need to power a dark-age "amount" of technology, windmills and water-wheels (or small hydroelectric dams if you're lucky in choice-of-location) would cover more than enough, no? And it's not like any of those are hard to build, or require any advanced principles; they get more efficient as your tech-base improves, but people living on frontiers in the 1800s were knocking them together for their family homes as soon as electricity became a thing that anyone had any use for.

And that's assuming we don't still have access to, say, the hardcopy US Patent filing records. You could get very far indeed with basic metalworking + modern knowledge of the optimal energy-collecting shapes for rotor blades.

[FullMtlAlcoholc]

True, but the condensed energy of fossil fuels would allow for tansportation and communication between otherwise isolated settlements, and greatly increase mining efficiency. As I recall the first steam engine was used to clear out leaded mines using steam pressure. Keeping existing people networked together allows for the exchange of people, ideas, services, goods, etc, drastically accelerating development

[Animats]

Have you ever seen a large peat moss power plant? Ireland has some. They're gross polluters.

[lettergram]

I have, I wasn't saying it's a great idea - just that there are alternatives to coal that are more renewable and readily available.

[astrodust]

Who thought that was a good idea?

[accountyaccount]

Once we're saturated enough with solar I can't imagine there being an easier ad-hoc way to generate energy for small groups in the post-apocalypse. I think you're right though that coal is the ultimate society at-scale fallback.

[FullMtlAlcoholc]

Hear hear! Ive always thought that in the case of a not quite extinction level event amd society/knowledge slides backwards, having easily accessible fossil fuels would help kickstart a new industrial revolution.

[NotSammyHagar]

interesting. the widespread dissemination of knowledge should make it easier to bootstrap ourselves up even after an apocalypse, but we certainly have tried to use up the easily accessible energy and minerals.

[ben_w]

Most of the dissemination is digital, which isn't so helpful if there is anything that kills power supplies. Saving coal might be a good part of a global disaster recovery plan, but I think we'll need the whole plan before we can really tell if it is a useful part of one.