A Dangerous Game

Editor’s Note: The following article on “clean” coal was written by Peter Montague, and distributed in Rachel’s Democracy & Health News. Eric personally met Peter during “the PCB wars,” and highly recommends rachel.orgВ for environmental news. To see the article in its original format, click here. –RA

[Rachel’s introduction: A new “reality coalition” has challenged theВ coal industry to “live up to the promise of so-called clean coal.”В But how serious is this new coalition?]

Five big enviro groups have just launched a new campaign to force theВ coal industry to put up or shut up about “clean coal.”

The Alliance for Climate Protection, League of Conservation Voters,В National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense CouncilВ (NRDC), and Sierra Club this week launched the “Reality Coalition,” anВ advertising campaign to — in their own words — “tell a simple truth:В in reality, there is no such thing as ‘clean coal.’

The first “Reality” print ad shows a solitary door labeled “Clean CoalВ Facility Entrance.” Behind the door, though, lies a barren field. “InВ reality, there’s no such thing as clean coal,” the ad says.

Reality’s first TV ad follows the same premise and can be viewed atВ http://www.thisisreality.org/.

The “reality coalition” is responding to the coal industry’s ownВ multi-million dollar ad campaign claiming that “clean coal” is theВ answer to global warming.

The coal industry defines “clean coal” as power plants that captureВ roughly 85% of their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, turn the CO2 intoВ a liquid, transport it via pipeline to a “suitable location,” and buryВ it a mile or so below ground, hoping it will stay there forever (thusВ passing today’s problem on to future generations).

Surprisingly, the “reality coalition” accepts the coal industry’sВ definition of “clean coal” — merely capturing most CO2 emissions andВ burying them in the ground. This is a very narrow definition ofВ “clean.”

How dirty is coal? Let me count the ways.

A new report from Greenpeace International discusses the followingВ problems created by dependence on coal:

Effects of mining coal: Deforestation, soil erosion, waterВ shortages, coal fires, greenhouse gas emissions, lower water tables,В destruction of mountains, dust particles and debris in surroundingВ communities, destruction of surrounding plant life, pollution ofВ nearby water bodies through runoff, displacement of communities due toВ mining, coal fires, landslides and contaminated water supplies, plusВ black lung disease.

Effects of burning coal: Water shortages from cooling of powerВ plants and “washing” of coal, air pollution and smog, serious mercuryВ pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, acid rain, and widespread lungВ disease from fine and ultrafine particles.В

Effects after burning: Abandoned mines, destroyed communities,В altered landscapes, soil damage and water pollution from acid mineВ drainage, destruction of fish and aquatic animals, collapsing minesВ causing structural damage to nearby roads, bridges and buildings,В kidney disease, and cancer, plus every year U.S. coal plants produceВ 120 million tons of toxic coal combustion wastes laced with lead,В arsenic and cadmium, most of which gets buried in the ground, creatingВ toxic time bombs.В

But the “reality coalition says only, “Coal cannot be considered cleanВ until its carbon dioxide emissions are captured and stored.”В

And: “No matter how much they say it in their advertising, coal can’tВ truly be clean until the plants can capture the global warmingВ pollution.”

Surely a coalition of major environmental groups can see that there isВ more to cleaning up coal than merely burying CO2 in the ground.

The “reality coalition” seems to be playing a dangerous game. The wayВ the “reality” campaign is framed, it invites the coal industry to meetВ the challenge by merely creating a few “demonstration” projects, whichВ will then be used to claim that “clean coal” has arrived. Indeed, oneВ small “demonstration” plant is already operating in Germany, and coalВ executives are already claiming it “demonstrates” that “clean coal” isВ real.В

The “reality coalition” has not defined what would constitute anВ “adequate demonstration” of “clean coal.” If the goal is to buryВ trillions of tons of CO2 in the ground and keep it there for, say,В 2000 years — how could you demonstrate success? Yes, you can stick aВ pipe in the ground and pump liquid CO2 into it for five years. But theВ day you declare the demonstration a “success,” leakage could begin theВ next day. So how can such a demonstration ever be declared a success?

And if a demonstration occurs under laboratory conditions for a fewВ years, does that mean that trillions of tons of CO2 can then beВ “safely” pumped into the ground for the next 50 years in China, India,В Russia and who knows where else? Are regulatory authorities in thoseВ countries even as vigilant as the sleepy agencies we tolerate in theВ U.S.?

Unless we specify what constitutes an adequate demonstration of carbonВ dioxide burial, and show that humans have the capacity to monitorВ operations for the duration of the hazard, arguably a few thousandВ years — which is something humans have never done before — weВ will be allowing the coal industry to define what constitutes a “cleanВ coal” success story. It’s like asking a den of foxes to defineВ “adequate safety” in the henhouse.

Pardon me for being skeptical, but one member of the “realityВ coalition” — Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)– since 2005В has been the main cheerleader for the coal industry’s plan toВ demonstrate “clean coal” without defining (a) what constitutesВ “success,” and (b) what sort of institutional framework could provideВ adequate regulatory oversight for the duration of the hazard. Indeed,В NRDC’s reckless slogan has been “CO2 capture and storage: Just doВ it!” Has this leopard changed its spots?

The rubber will meet the road the next time the coal industry and itsВ friends in government (like Barack Obama and Joe Biden) ask CongressВ for $20 or $30 billion to pump CO2 into the ground for a few years asВ a “demonstration” of clean coal. If the “reality coalition” doesn’tВ oppose such give-aways to the coal industry, we’ll know they’re notВ serious about making the coal industry demonstrate that clean coal isВ technically feasible and economically viable. In the meantime,В it’s a dangerous game they are playing. A dangerous game.

В

To see more photographs by Sean Hayes, click here.