Coal Energy

A recent ad campaign in North America--sponsored of course, by coal companies, is touting a new greener coal industry as a solution to the problem of global warming. Considering coal is made primarily from carbon it seems unlikely to me that the coal industry will be able to make such a turnaround. Coal contains 24 kilograms of carbon for each gigajoule of energy it produces, while natural gas has only around 15 kilograms of carbon for the same amount of energy. Ultimately, that means even burning natural gas is less destructive to the atmosphere than burning coal. That may be simplifying it a bit, but it's true.

Nobody's Hero

Coals greenhouse gas emissions, along with the fact that extracting coal tends to be a very dirty and often dangerous process for miners, makes coal an unlikely saviour. Coal mining is usually associated with rising acidity levels in nearby waterways, known as acid mine drainage. And the harmful effects continue whether the mind is in operation or not. Whenever rain falls and the water drains from the mine, the exposed coal seam leaches sulphuric acid into nearby streams. Not only do waterways suffer, but the air above collects that same acidic quality, and in many coal mining areas acid rain is a common occurrence.

The Enablers

However, the coal industry is gaining political and economic support because of unstable gas prices, and underdeveloped infrastructure for many of the other alternative energy sources. The US Department of Energy estimates that coal reserves are in the range of 1,081,279 million short tons of coal. If this is the case, at current consumption rates coal would last us 285 years. However, because of the detrimental environmental effects, it should be considered a last resort. Seeing as there are far cleaner ways to drive our economies and power our lives, coal can be pushed to the sidelines as far as I'm concerned.

Coal's Not in Kansas Anymore, Toto

Recently, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment rejected the permit for a coal-fired power plant in Holcomb, Kansas, citing co2 emissions as the reason. They were the first state in the US to do so, and has hopefully set a precedent for other states looking to lower their contribution to global warming. The Clean Air Act has now labelled CO2 a pollutant, so it's now legal to deny their permit based on their high emissions. Because of their mandate to protect the public health and environment, the agency said it would be "irresponsible" to ignore emerging data that links greenhouse gas emissions to global warming. The company who wanted to build the plant has threatened to appeal, we can only pray that their appeals will fail, and the people of Holcomb's lungs and waterways will be saved.

Source(s): Wikipedia,

Kingsbury, Alex. "Power Plants Nixed for CO2". U.S. News & World Report; 10/29/2007, Vol. 143 Issue 15, pg. 16.