I wrote a couple of weeks ago here on clean coal technology. First of all, let me explain that I am not rooting against the possibility of finding some way to capture and sequester carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants and other sources. It's just that there is so much reliance on coal now, and it appears for the foreseeable future, and we still have no reliable technology on hand that utilities and others see as cost-effective, that it seems the much more intelligent choice to phase coal and other fossil fuels out. That's what it comes down to at this point. We will do much better, environmentally and economically, if we move away now from the massive reliance on coal.
Now when I say we, I mean the US which still relies on coal for 50% of its electricity. I also mean the Europeans who, believe it or not, are looking to build new plants. I, of course, also mean the Indians and especially the Chinese. See China Increases Lead as Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter from today's "NY Times." Elisabeth Rosenthal, their international health and environmental reporter, looks at the new study from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and writes: "China is heavily dependent on coal and has seen its most rapid growth in some of the world's most heavily polluting industrial sectors: cement, aluminum and plate glass." Listen to Rosenthal's interview at this terrific podcast. You can also see the discussion at the blog "Dot Earth."
So, if we stick with coal, it's going to cost us dearly, either with an inexorable slide to real climate change catastrophe , see the IPCC's projections , or, if we face the challenge of CCS, with astronomical costs. "Trading Carbon," " which is published by Point Carbon, the excellent news and information service on energy and environmental markets, had a story in their May issue on CCS. Robin Lancaster, the editor, and the writer of the story, says in his lead editorial in the magazine " the technology is available to capture carbon dioxide at its source, transport it, and then store it underground. However, the extra cost of putting this technology in place is currently one of the main stumbling blocks to project development." You can read Going Underground here. It's a great, comprehensive look at the forces working for and against a commercially viable CCS technology.
Here's another recent story, from the "FT" – BP axes plan for carbon capture plant in which we learn that the canceled project in question, for a coal-fired plant in Australia, follows on the heels of another cancellation in Scotland.
For more perspective on CCS, you can visit the website for European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP), an industry group, and this from Shell.
(I'll have some more on CCS in the next day or two, so stay tuned.)
