Clean coal projects all over America

It’s apparent that the creators of the Reality Coalition TV spots didn’t spend much time locating current clean coal technology projects before declaring them nonexistent. After all, we have a map of them right here on our Web site. (And remember, 'clean coal' refers to more than just carbon capture and sequestration.)

The projects include a host of CCS pilot-level projects (hey, you have to run before you can walk), many of which are co-funded by the coal industry and the government. Of course, if this is going to be a battle of absolutes, I guess it should also be noted that there isn’t a single commercial scale wind or solar project capable of replacing baseload fuels like coal.

On a related note, I noticed that our friends at the Reality Coalition attributed a (selective) quote of mine on their web site. While I did state that we currently lack a commercial-scale CCS project in the U.S., I went on to say that there are several live pilot-scale demonstration projects in the U.S., and that the first commercial-scale project is set to launch in 2009. I guess accuracy in the media isn’t what it used to be.

 But here’s a complete, accurate quote for you from former Vice President, Nobel-laureate and Academy Award-winner Al Gore, talking about the importance of CCS to a group of students at New York University:

 Fortunately, there may be a way to capture the CO2 produced as coal is burned and sequester it safely to prevent it from adding to the climate crisis. It is not easy. This technique, known as carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is expensive and most users of coal have resisted the investments necessary to use it. However, when the cost of not using it is calculated, it becomes obvious that CCS will play a significant and growing role as one of the major building blocks of a solution to the climate crisis.

So I guess I don’t understand—the environmental groups following a person who believes clean coal technology can help prevent climate change are the same groups that oppose the clean coal projects they claim don’t exist?

Comments

[Al]

I just saw your latest propaganda commercial featuring Obama. What a way to spin.

Still trying to push the clean coal lie? There’s a lot money in this for someone. It’s going to be like big sugar trying to convince Floridians that all the chemicals and the fires are actually GOOD for the Everglades.

You’re all a bunch of LYING LIARS.

I’m sure my comment will make it onto your site.

[David]

You tree huggers are comical. Wind and solar cannot provide the energy we need. Coal is here to stay. Deal with it.

[Scott]

Spending the money to scale up any clean coal technology (none of which have been proven to be viable when scaled up) is a wasted investment. Wind and solar combined with raised efficiency standards and conservation can provide our future energy needs. The phrase "Clean Coal" truly is an oxymoron, on par with "Dry Water".

[Jeff]

I cannot accept any of this- I knew about the destructive mountain top removal and the slurry that's dumped into and onto the environment. This week I have learned about the slurry ponds AFTER coal is burned. Why no news in big Media on it? Ask General Electric-who by the way owns NBC, MSNBC, and 26 total TV stations.
I don't buy it.

[Megan from ACCCE]

“Wasted investment” is pretty inaccurate, if you ask me.

Currently, wind and solar are no match for coal’s baseload power capabilities (though they are great for peaking power, and we support the growth of renewables as we understand they’re essential to our domestic energy mix). Furthermore, there are more than 80 carbon capture and sequestration projects—most of which are here in the U.S.—capable of capturing and storing CO2. That’s on top of the 77 percent reduction in overall emissions currently regulated under existing Clean Air Act programs per unit of energy produced due to investments in clean coal technologies.

Each of our energy resources has advantages and challenges. It's up to us to find solutions to the latter.