MODERN TIMES

Art Hobson

ahobson@uark.edu

NWA Times 20 Jan 2007

 

New Coal Plants:  A Looming Catastrophe

 

              The coal industry likes to tout its new Òclean coalÓ technology and itÕs true that coal-fired electrical generating plants are cleaner than they used to be.  But the largest and dirtiest pollution hasnÕt been cleaned up at all:  coal plants still emit 100 percent of their carbon dioxide (CO2). 

              Carbon dioxide is not just a small by-product; itÕs the primary product of coal combustion.  A large plant consumes some 10,000 tons of coal per day and emits over 30,000 tons of CO2—more than three times the weight of the coal itself.  ThatÕs a lot of carbon.  CO2 emissions from coal have grown by 24 percent since 1990, and are responsible for one-third of all U.S. CO2 emissions.  So coal is a huge polluter, and getting worse. 

              As practically everybody knows by now, CO2 is the main Ògreenhouse gasÓ causing global warming.  According to the overwhelming scientific consensus, global warming is happening now, the planet has already warmed by over 1 degree Fahrenheit, and the consequences are serious and getting worse.  The Kyoto agreement calls for industrialized nations to reduce emissions by 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; Europe is moving toward this goal and plans to emit 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.  Although California recently announced plans to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, the U.S. already emits 13 percent above 1990 levels and the world emits 26 percent above 1990 levels.  During the industrial age, weÕve pushed global CO2 concentrations from their natural level of 280 CO2 molecules per million air molecules to 380 parts per million; weÕre fast approaching the dangerous 450 parts per million level beyond which scientists believe that dangerous climate change may spin entirely out of human control.  WeÕd better get to work. 

              Coal industry plans will make things far worse.  Worldwide economic expansion and the high price of natural gas have created a global Òcoal rush.Ó  Three nations—China, India, and the U.S.—plan 850 new coal plants, which would pump far more CO2 into the atmosphere than the Kyoto agreement aims to reduce .  Although China is the dominant player, over 150 of these plants are in the U.S.  We already release some 25 percent of global CO2 emissions, despite having only 5 percent of the planetÕs population.  The new coal plants will boost U.S. emissions by 10 percent and world emissions by 2.4 percent.  New plants are planned near Osceola and Texarkana, and near Sallisaw, Oklahoma, 30 miles west of Fort Smith. 

              Fortunately, there is a smart way to solve these plantsÕ global warming threat.  The technology exists for coal plants to capture nearly all their carbon dioxide and store it deep underground.  Geologists believe that all the CO2 produced by fossil fuel power plants during this century can be stored safely for hundreds to thousands of years—long enough that its leakage rate will not create global warming problems.  Experts believe that this technology could solve as much as 55 percent of the global warming problem. 

              Carbon storage can be used with any coal plant, but it is cheapest and most effective with the ÒgasifiedÓ coal plants planned for 15 percent of our new coal plants.  This will raise the price of coal-generated electricity by 1 to 5 cents per kilowatt hour, added onto the present price of about 5 cents. 

              ThereÕs little doubt that new coal plants will eventually store all their carbon, and the extra expense will be seen as a necessary cost of doing business.  By allowing those plants to foul the atmosphere with CO2, humankind presently pays that cost, in spades, in the form of environmental destruction.  The cost belongs with the coal industry and their customers.  This is just one example of the fundamental truth that the environmental ÒexternalitiesÓ of every industry must be incorporated into the cost of business if the free marketÕs Òhidden handÓ is not to destroy the environment.  Industries that routinely destroy the environment are effectively and unfairly subsidized by the environment, introducing a ÒdistortionÓ into the market.  Besides the coal industry, another prime example is the automobile industry.  Both are overused because they are underpriced.  That price differential is being paid, but itÕs being paid—in spades--by the planet and everybodyÕs health instead of by industry and its customers.  Business colleges should incorporate this environmental perspective into their teaching, but seldom do. 

              A national solution is preferable.  For example, the current Lieberman-McCain global warming bill would ÒcapÓ carbon emissions in such as way as to push emissions downward to 1990 levels by 2020.  Under this bill, permits to emit carbon will be issued to companies allowing them to emit carbon up to a certain limit.  These permits will be Òtradable,Ó meaning that efficient companies will have excess permits that they can sell to inefficient companies.  Thus, the market will set a price on CO2 emissions.  ItÕs estimated that, once that price reaches about $40 per ton, it will be profitable for coal plants to store their emissions, and global warming will be incorporated into the economics of coal. 

              But until that day arrives, we must keep in mind that each new coal plant planned for Osceola, Texarkana, Sallisaw, and elsewhere will last some 60 years.  Far from being Òclean,Ó they are planet killers if they emit their CO2 to the atmosphere.  Citizens must demand that they store those emissions. 

LINK TO ART HOBSON'S HOMEPAGE