NY Times Lead Story: So Much for "Clean Coal"

By: Lowell
Published On: 5/30/2008 6:27:50 AM

The headline in today's New York Times pretty much sums up we're at with regards to "clean coal" -- "Mounting Costs Slow the Push for Clean Coal."

...it has become clear in recent months that the nation's effort to develop the technique is lagging badly.

In January, the government canceled its support for what was supposed to be a showcase project, a plant at a carefully chosen site in Illinois where there was coal, access to the power grid, and soil underfoot that backers said could hold the carbon dioxide for eons.

Perhaps worse, in the last few months, utility projects in Florida, West Virginia, Ohio, Minnesota and Washington State that would have made it easier to capture carbon dioxide have all been canceled or thrown into regulatory limbo.

[...]

"It's a total mess," said Daniel M. Kammen, director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley.

In short, "clean coal" is on life support right now.  Why should we care?  Because, as the NY Times article points out, building "the next generation of coal plants using existing technology" -- like Dominion's proposed Wise County as currently configured -- will "ensure that vast amounts of global warming gases would be pumped into the atmosphere for decades."  

If "clean coal" won't work, what are the other options for the nation's energy future?  First and foremost, we need a massive push for energy efficiency -- using significantly less energy per unit of economic output.  This is, by far and away, the lowest of "low hanging fruit" in the energy world, as it is far cheaper to save a watt of energy than to produce a new one.  Second, we need to develop promising renewable energy sources like wind (onshore and offshore), tidal, wave, deep geothermal, and solar (both PV and concentrated thermal). Finally, we need to consider nuclear power as an option, as it emits no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Every day that goes by that we don't start the shift to a new energy economy is a lost opportunity, environmentally and economically. What are we waiting for? Certainly not "clean coal."


Comments



Thus is where I truly believe we can make headway (Alter of Freedom - 5/30/2008 12:14:14 PM)
Look I make no apologies for where I stand in terms of coal. It is one if not the number one natural resource we have that could help use really solve our dependence issues. History has shown (Germany in 1930-40's, South Africa today as well) that liquid coal can be achieved and manufactured. Will it be costly? Sure. If we committ to it as well as get together with some real compromises on energy together we can I believe make real progress. Will both sides have to give some, of course, but any progress we make moves the bar a little further to getting where I think we all want to go.
Even people like Gingrich as crazy as it sounds is moving more towards the acknowledgment of issues even he was not willing to do five years ago. I know there are some differecnes of course in how we solve the issues but at least we can begin to have the conversation on actually solving them. You know where I stand with coal- I do not thinkwe can go cold turkey in years it could take decades because we need the underlying tech to catch up with everyday Amercia...we have seen this in some of the auto scenarios and stations in California etc..Will it take investment? Yes. But so does univeral healthcare does it not? How much will we spend in the end to get that? Our military today is finding some pretty unique ways of solving the fuel issue as well, especially our airwing components. There is a lot we can do and we have a lot to look forward to, but my fear is we will get into this politcial cross fire of liberal and conservatives (alot like immigration frankly) that will forever cloud the wisdoms of both sides.
First I would like to side to committ to action, that we need to make things happen on multiple fronts and then determine how we can fund them instead of staing because we can't fund these things they are relevent. Ideas are never irrelevent in my book nor is the value of open debate for the common purpose of our future generations.