Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Big Coal's Dirty Plans for Our Energy Future (with shocking photos)
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Today's Economic Crisis in Historical Perspective
Democracy and Elections:
More Unfinished 2008 Election Business: Verifiable Vote Counts
Steven Rosenfeld
DrugReporter:
A New Approach to Drugs Would Save New York Hundreds of Millions of Dollars
Gabriel Sayegh
Election 2008:
Franken Lawyer: "We Are Going To Win"
Sam Stein
Environment:
Forget the Polar Bears -- The Climate Crisis Is About All of Us
George Monbiot
ForeignPolicy:
Obama Needs to Make a Clean Break on Latin America
Mark Weisbrot
Health and Wellness:
Obama's Health Care Reform Plan Is Based on the Clintons' Failed 1990s Model
Marie Cocco
Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman
Immigration:
Immigrant Rights Signed Away?
Jennifer Lee Koh, Esq.
Media and Technology:
Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives
Doron Taussig
Movie Mix:
Love Bites: What Sexy Vampires Tell Us About Our Culture
Sarah Seltzer
Reproductive Justice and Gender:
The Hymen Mystique
Carole Roye
Rights and Liberties:
Ban the Cluster Bomb
Brian Cook
Sex and Relationships:
A Message for Sex Educators: Sex Is Not Dirty
Lorraine Kenny
War on Iraq:
The Dilemma of Foreign Prisoners in Iraq
Ma'ad Fayad
Water:
Corporate Water Abusers Should Not Be Trusted As Stewards of the World's Water
Wenonah Hauter
Just as the American people and the world are beginning to recognize the necessity of shifting to renewable energies, Big Coal, in collusion with an out-of-step administration, is pushing its dirty fossil fuel as the solution to our nation's energy crisis.
Big Coal and its cohorts envision a "clean coal technology" future fueled by liquifying and gasifying coal, capturing the carbon emissions and injecting them underground. By 2030 the West Virginia Division of Energy -- a nascent state agency formed in July 2007 -- wants to oust oil and exalt coal by displacing the 1.3 billion gallons of foreign oil the state currently imports every year.
The WVDoE believes "that higher energy prices are providing and will continue to provide market opportunities" for a variety of alternative coal technologies, including "coal waste, coal fines and coal bed methane," according to a document released in December 2007 called "A Blueprint for the Future."
But scientists and environmentalists say "clean coal" does not exist; it is a misnomer and an oxymoron. The National Resources Defense Council says that using the term "clean coal" makes about as much sense as saying "safe cigarettes." The extraction and cleaning of coal inevitably decimate ecosystems and communities.
Citing abundant supplies of quality domestic coal, escalating oil prices that are hoving around $100 per barrel and security concerns raised by dependence on foreign oil, the coal industry is chomping at the bit to secure its stake in the false pursuit of domestic energy independence through a federally assisted, coal-based economy. But as the world wakes up to the climate crisis and people learn more about modern coal mining and the continuing exploitation of Appalachia, which has sickened entire communities, polluted the water and air, and condemned vast sections of an ecologically extraordinary land to death, the coal industry faces an increasingly uphill battle against growing public awareness and concern.
Just this year, plans for a dozen new coal plants in Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Kansas and others have been repudiated by the growing public awareness and concern about the role of coal and other fossil fuels in our climate crisis. Playing on stereotypes and employing scare tactics about the unpredictability of the Middle East, the coal industry is developing a Frankenstein-like future for U.S. energy needs.
In Kansas, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius recently blocked plans for two coal-fired electricity plants; afterward, on Nov. 5, a full page ad in Kansas newspapers explained that now, because of Sebelius' decision, "Kansas will import more natural gas from countries like Russia, Venezuela and Iran." The ad displayed the grinning faces of the leaders of these countries and continued, "Without new coal-fueled plants in our state, experts predict that electric bills will skyrocket and Kansans will be more dependent than ever on hostile, foreign energy sources." In fact, Kansas exports natural gas to other states, and the United States does not even import natural gas from Russia, Venezuela or Iran, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Why carbon capture is no safety net
Nationwide there are grandiose plans for more than 100 new coal-fired power plants, but they all hinge on being able to sell the public and legislators on outfitting and funding these new plants with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. This process siphons off or "captures" carbon dioxide before it can escape into the atmosphere, contributing to acid rain, smog and warming the planet. The sequestered carbon would then be pumped and stored underground.
But is it really possible to bury our daily CO2 emission? Australia's renown physicist, Karl Kruszelnicki, who is running for public office on the Climate Change Coalition ticket, told the Sydney Morning Herald on Nov. 1, "One cubic kilometer of CO2 to get rid of every day? It's not possible! But they don't tell you that that's what they've got to get rid of. They make reassuring noises that they're spending millions looking for underground caverns. But I'm here to tell you that they're not going to find it ... The point is that they can only store 1,000th of 1 percent, not all their daily output."
Not only do we not have the capacity to store all the CO2 we produce, but the technology isn't there yet. The coal industry acknowledges that CCS is 15 years away, but continues to promulgate the myth of "clean coal technology" and guide generous government subsidies to themselves and to West Virginia universities, assigning valuable research money to dirty technology. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology's 2007 report "The Future of Coal" stated that "there is no standard for measurement, monitoring, and verification of CO2 distribution. Duration of post-injection monitoring is an unresolved issue."
See more stories tagged with: water, global warming, climate change, coal, slideshow, multimedia, appalachia
Antrim Caskey is a Brooklyn-based independent photojournalist who has been reporting on the human and environmental costs of Mountaintop Removal/Valley Fill coal mining since May 2005.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »