Search Helium

Home > Politics, News & Issues > Environmental Issues > Energy Issues

Assuming we can capture and store emissions, should we continue to rely on coal as a primary energy source?

Title endorsed in part by:

Results so far:

Yes
41% 61 votes Total: 148 votes
No
59% 87 votes

Yes

by iiivix

Created on: December 15, 2007

If we can eliminate emissions from coal plants, this carbon rich mineral can be used as a primary energy source. America is sitting on top of billions of tons of charcoal. Each person in the US uses 3.8 tons every year. This energy wonder has received many environmental improvements.

Coal is now a clean fuel. Increased environmental awareness has brought forth a new age in coal. This carbon lump is used the same way but its exhaust is cleaned better. Through different treatments with limestone absorbing the nitrogen, sulfur, and dust left overs that can produce acid rain and are greenhouse coolers.

Limestone cleaning treatments reduce sulfur emissions by 90%. An even cleaner form of coal is in gas form. Coal gas is created through gasification of coal and has the same heating value as natural gas. This gas form of coal has a 99.9% reduction in particulates and sulfur emissions.

Particulates is dust that blocks light from reaching the earth. This filtering of light cools the earth. Particulates are a major help in reducing the effects of greenhouse gases. During the 3 days after 9/11 plane traffic was down, eliminating con trail particulates. This absence raised the average high/low temperature in America by 2 degrees every day.

We do have clean coal and we have to use it!

Learn more about this author, iiivix.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

No

by John Carr

Created on: October 10, 2008

All fossil fuels have something in common: They are spoils of plunder.

Our civilization is based on a very complex system of plunder. When the cache stops giving, the civilization ends. It's an old lesson that's been learned by many dead civilizations.




Plundering the coal reserves has a limited life. At the current rate of consumption, we have about 100 years worth of useable coal. The Energy Information Agency, who is very optimistic about fossil fuels, estimates we have closer to 200 years of useable coal reserves. When I get depressed, I go read an EIA report. There's nothing like fantasy to cheer you up! We have known the size of the proven coal reserves in this country for almost 100 years. I personally researched this matter for Peabody Coal, and Koppers a few years ago. If we use coal for transportation fuel, it may only last 30 to 40 years. Coal is not exactly a long term solution for power.




What about the 'clean' in clean coal. There are three types of clean coal processes.

1. Emission Controls with modified combustion. This is just a fancy way of saying, same plant, different fuel. Adding saw dust to coal, or other additives has been considered a clean process since they can reduce sulfur emissions. Some methods have merit, but generally it's putting lipstick on a pig.

2. Gasification. The carbon in coal is converted to water gas, (carbon monoxide), the solids are removed and the sulfur is precipitated as a liquid. This type of process has been around over 75 years. It takes a lot of energy to make water gas. Water gas does not have the heating value of carbon, much of the heating value in coal is lost in the process. So, pound for pound, you get less energy. Making water gas has a rich past. Unfortunately, the designers of the current IGCC plants haven't done a decent literature review. The major problems with gasification are costs and operational difficulties. The product, electricity, doesn't have enough value in many areas to justify gasification. Compressing and sequestering carbon dioxide magnifies the problems of costs. Gasification for power production lives in the land of diminishing returns. Don't get your hopes up.

3. Liquifaction. Coal is liquified in its own oils to produce a wide variety of chemicals, fertilizer, and fuel. There is currently only one plant in operations using liquifaction. It's doing very well. Long before cheap oil, coal was supplying fuel and chemicals to the public. Liquifaction is the best chance for clean coal. The carbon dioxide from the plant is compressed and pumped into the oil fields of Canada. In my opinion, it's a winner. With value added products, and a proximity to oil field storage capacity it is the only example that meets all the criteria for 'clean' coal technology.




Coal has a rich history of being used to make valuable products. Koppers still makes carbon anodes for the aluminum smelting industry from coal. It seems very short sighted to simply dig and burn coal. Coal has a wealth of complex hydrocarbons, nanoparticles, and the stuff researchers dream of. The owners of the coal deposits don't care about the uses for coal. I know, because I've asked. All they want is cash.




If we rely on short term profits to light the way, we are lost, and we have sold our birthright for a bowl of dirt.

Learn more about this author, John Carr.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.


CONNECT WITH US

Read
our blog
Helum for writers

Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills

Join our active writing community
Helium Content Source for Publishers

Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all

Get custom content today!

INFORMATION


Helium, Inc.
200 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810 USA