Clean coal isn’t clean enough
Illinois sits atop the nation’s second-largest coal reserves. Whether that fuel represents the nation’s energy future or its past is the subject of an increasingly bitter debate playing out over the nation’s airwaves.
Industry groups have been working hard to sell the concept of “clean” coal, that is, coal that can be burned using new technologies that reduce or capture and store dangerous emissions. But earlier this month, a coalition of environmental groups concerned about global warming began airing a series of ads built around the slogan “In reality, there is no such thing as clean coal.”
Those ads prompted the coal industry to fire back with ads of its own: “The reality: It’s here, and it’s made coal over 70 percent cleaner.”
At its core, this is a burning debate over how best to meet future energy needs in an era of global warming and a system of carbon emission caps, which almost certainly will be enacted in the near future.
Coal is the most abundant fossil fuel in the United States. About half the nation’s electricity is generated in coal-fired plants. At current usage rates, the country has sufficient coal reserves to last for centuries.
But coal also is the dirtiest fossil fuel. Newer technologies have reduced the amount chemicals that cause acid rain and smog, which are produced when coal burns. That’s what coal companies such as St. Louis-based Peabody Energy and coal-burning electric utilities mean when they talk about cleaner coal.
But chemicals aren’t the only problem with the emissions. Each year, coal-fired power plants in the United States also emit 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that causes global warming. That’s what environmentalists mean when they say there is no such thing as clean coal.
On average, U.S. coal-fired power plants are 35 years old. Decisions about whether to upgrade or replace them are being made now.
Last week, President-elect Barack Obama named his choices for the key energy and environment posts in his administration. During the campaign, he promised to support a bill to create a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions. That would mean setting a price on carbon emissions, which would give utilities an incentive to reduce pollution.
But capturing all or even most of that 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide would be an enormous undertaking. Just a handful of small power plants around the globe are capable of capturing carbon dioxide, and only one or two actually do it.
Among the many problems is that 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide takes up an immense amount of space. In a 2007 report, experts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that:
• All the carbon dioxide emitted by the nation’s coal-fired power plants, if captured for storage, would take up as much space as all the natural gas currently transported over the nation’s pipeline system.
• If just 60 percent of the carbon dioxide were compressed into liquid form, it would take up the equivalent of 20 million barrels of oil to hold it.
• Moving captured carbon dioxide from where it is produced to where it would have to be stored would require an investment of billions of dollars. Of course, before that could be done, we would need to have answers to basic questions about where and how to store it.
In Germany in September, a small plant began trapping carbon dioxide from a coal-fired boiler. Eventually, the CO2 will be pumped into a nearly depleted oil field. If all goes well — always a big “if” with new technology — experts say the process could become cost-effective in a little more a decade. But that assumes that between now and then, scores of similar plants are built to test and perfect the technology.
It’s true that coal-fired plants are cleaner than they used to be, and it is possible — in theory — that they actually will be clean at some point. It is in the nation’s interest to pursue that goal. But clean coal is not a reality now, and determining whether it ever can be truly clean will take years.
Funny. Take the following sentence:
“But clean coal is not a reality now, and determining whether it ever can be truly clean will take years.”
Replace “clean coal” with any other alternative energy source. Does anyone else need a clearer explanation why we should be drilling for our own oil to fill the gaps before all of these wonder technologies actually prove they are viable?
Humans inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. How long is it going to take you guys to come up with a breath tax, Doc? Of course the fitness folks who breathe heavily while exercising would need some kind of offset from the junk food eaters who cost more in health care. I’m sure you guys will help the government figure it all out, though.
For decades, environmentalists have fought nuclear power. Yet nuclear is the only source which has the ability to meet our long-term energy needs without contributing to global warming. Sorry, folks, but you can’t put up enough windmills to air condition John Edwards’ 28,000 square foot house. So what’s it going to be, nuclear power or no more air conditioning?
Have to agree with an earlier post. All these people that are so concerned about alleged global warming are never willing to discuss nuclear power, which is the only existing power source that can does not release CO2 and can be built at a true industrial scale. Wind and solar are wonderful toys, but will never be able to produce the uninterrupted power we need.
An excellent re-write of thisisreality.org’s press release.
http://action.thisisreality.org/about
Any chance you’ll publish the soon-to-be-received Thank You notes from the Mother Gaia crowd:
League of Conservation Voters — Natural Resources Defense Council — National Wildlife Federation — Sierra Club — 1Sky — Chesapeake Climate Action Network — Earth Day Network — Energy Action Coalition — Environment America
===
I wonder how many of these groups have air conditioning in their offices.
> League of Conservation Voters — Natural Resources Defense Council —
> National Wildlife Federation — Sierra Club — 1Sky — Chesapeake Climate
> Action Network — Earth Day Network — Energy Action Coalition —
> Environment America
“Humans inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide.”
And trees and other plant life forms are able to process the carbon dioxide back into oxygen. However, cut down the trees, pave over the plants and then put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels, coal, etc., and, then have the effluence from the burn-off from coal and other manufacturing return to the ground, lakes, oceans as acid rain — well then you might just have a problem.
Already in China this situation has gotten so bad that their crops are being damaged and creating a problem in their food supply. This on top of children in certain coal burning areas getting black lung disease from playing outside.
No, if it was just mammals exhaling carbon dioxide, there would not be the problem.
Wind technology has been around and in use for quite sometime now. Solar power has also been around for quite some time.
What has not been done is the investment in infrastructure in these technologies because of coal and petroleum use were “cheaper”. It had everything to do with “economics” and very little to do with availability of technology.
The US has more coal reserves than the middle east has sand. It makes NO sense that we send money to countries that hate us while we sit on our own reserves of energy sources that could free us from dependence on foreign energy. As it stands now, when America has truly fallen, the next nation that forms here will have PLENTY of natural energy resources to exploit for their survival, God knows it wont do us any good now. Cap and Trade is an absolute failure in Europe, it is nothing more than ANOTHER tax on producers. The incoming administration promises tougher C&T taxes, so our energy crisis will ONLY get worse.
I agree with RHarnack. Too many humans, not enough plants. Do you think increasing abortions will be part of Obama’s plan?
The answer isn’t the government, it is the people. There’s some momentum created by the high fuel prices this summer. Don’t blow your chance greenies. Get more people aware of your message and propose workable plans for people to become more energy independent. This is a national security and environmental issue. Coal is one of the pieces. If coal can be made cleaner, then so be it. Add nuclear, solar and wind and you’ve got a good start. Stop the whining, trade in your SUV, and do something. Carbon credits are not going to help diddly do.