If By Clean You Mean Filthy
by Umbra Fisk
Grist (July 23 2008)
Question
Dear Umbra,
I noticed that several of the presidential primary debates were
sponsored by clean coal. This was announced during breaks and several
commercials aired. I have since seen several more commercials and online
advertisements. Is clean coal an oxymoron? Is this a PR stunt or are
there any real environmental benefits to clean coal that rival solar and
wind? See www.americaspower.org.
Andrew S.
Brookline, Massachusetts
Answer
Dearest Andrew,
The link you sent to America's Power is a divine example of clean,
selective fact presentation: "Sometimes, we tend to forget about the
role electricity has on our lives [sic]. Did you know that half of the
electricity that heats our homes, lights our schools, and powers our
businesses comes from coal?" What about sports events? Is coal involved
in sports events? Because I feel a cheer coming on.
I think these penetrating insights are meant to sway us over to the
coal. I do forget the role electricity has on my life, and I do forget
that half of the United States' electricity supply comes from coal.
These coal people know me so well. They seem so nice. Too bad I want
them all out of business.
Why? Because coal is affiliated with our most famous environmental
problems here in the US: Almost all acid rain is coal-derived; coal is
the leading source of mercury emissions; mountaintop removal mining has
destroyed ecosystems in the Southeast; and now, it is one of two fuel
sources most closely affiliated with global climate change.
It is this last infamy that so concerns not only coal executives but
anyone with half an ear tuned to the dire radio station of the future.
Coal is a currently cheap, plentiful domestic fuel; it is also plentiful
in other electricity-hungry nations such as India and China. In the US,
electricity from coal already produces more carbon dioxide emissions
than the entire transportation sector.
So clean coal is both an oxymoronic PR stunt and a general term for
efforts toward better coal-derived power. The Clean Coal Technology
Program of the Department of Energy started back in 1985, so in a way
clean coal refers to any of the cleaning techniques (scrubbers, washing)
that can make coal more palatable and less deadly to our health and
planet. Coal plants have, in fact, made improvements over the past few
decades in response to acid rain-related governmental regulations
regarding sulfur, particulates, and nitrogen oxides.
These days, clean coal mostly seems to refer to reducing carbon dioxide
emissions. The issue of coal and global warming is simple: Coal is a
horridly dirty fuel that contributes frightening amounts of carbon
dioxide to the atmosphere, and we can't afford to increase the amounts
of carbon dioxide we add to the atmosphere. Newer ideas behind the
"clean coal" phrase are gasification - a thermo-chemical, non-burning
way to get energy from coal - and carbon capture and
storage/sequestration (CCS). Remember the great idea of sending nuclear
waste into space? CCS is the carbon counterpart: Take our
world-destroying gas and pump it into underground holes or deep ocean
caverns.
Herein lies the dilemma: Should we spend money and time researching and
developing technology to make coal less awful? Or is this a stupid
misdirection of human capital, better spent on solar, wind, hydro, ocean
power, and conservation? Within these basic choices lie multitudes of
questions about global responsibility, costs per kilowatt, the potential
of technology, the role of corporate money in government policy, and the
will of the people.
Does coal have environmental benefits to rival solar and wind? No. But
it's easy to burn and there is tons of it. That bounty and our hunger
for electricity complicate things. And boy, is it complicated.
Of course, this summary of the issues is necessarily and shockingly
brief. But if you wish to learn more, you're in luck: You can find a lot
of satisfyingly dense information about the clean coal debate on our
very own Gristmill blog.
Loyally,
Umbra
____
http://www.grist.org/advice/ask/2008/07/23/index.html?source=rss
