{"id":7492,"date":"2008-12-08T17:00:44","date_gmt":"2008-12-08T22:00:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/?p=7492"},"modified":"2011-05-17T06:08:06","modified_gmt":"2011-05-17T11:08:06","slug":"a-dangerous-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/environment\/a-dangerous-game\/","title":{"rendered":"A Dangerous Game"},"content":{"rendered":"

Editor’s Note<\/strong>: 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 <\/em>rachel.org<\/em><\/a>\u0412\u00a0for environmental news. To see the article in its original format, click here<\/a>. –RA<\/em><\/p>\n

[Rachel’s introduction: A new “reality coalition” has challenged the\u0412\u00a0coal industry to “live up to the promise of so-called clean coal.”\u0412\u00a0But how serious is this new coalition?]<\/p>\n

Five big enviro groups have just launched a new campaign to force the\u0412\u00a0coal industry to put up or shut up about “clean coal.”<\/p>\n

The Alliance for Climate Protection<\/a>, League of Conservation Voters,\u0412\u00a0National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council\u0412\u00a0(NRDC), and Sierra Club this week launched the “Reality Coalition,” an\u0412\u00a0advertising campaign to — in their own words — “tell a simple truth:\u0412\u00a0in reality, there is no such thing as ‘clean coal.’<\/p>\n

The first “Reality” print ad shows a solitary door labeled “Clean Coal\u0412\u00a0Facility Entrance.” Behind the door, though, lies a barren field. “In\u0412\u00a0reality, there’s no such thing as clean coal,” the ad says.<\/p>\n

Reality’s first TV ad follows the same premise and can be viewed at\u0412\u00a0http:\/\/www.thisisreality.org\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The “reality coalition” is responding to the coal industry’s own\u0412\u00a0multi-million dollar ad campaign claiming that “clean coal” is the\u0412\u00a0answer to global warming.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The coal industry defines “clean coal” as power plants that capture\u0412\u00a0roughly 85% of their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, turn the CO2 into\u0412\u00a0a liquid, transport it via pipeline to a “suitable location,” and bury\u0412\u00a0it a mile or so below ground, hoping it will stay there forever (thus\u0412\u00a0passing today’s problem on to future generations).<\/p>\n

Surprisingly, the “reality coalition” accepts the coal industry’s\u0412\u00a0definition of “clean coal” — merely capturing most CO2 emissions and\u0412\u00a0burying them in the ground. This is a very narrow definition of\u0412\u00a0“clean.”<\/p>\n

How dirty is coal? Let me count the ways.<\/p>\n

A new report<\/a> from Greenpeace International discusses the following\u0412\u00a0problems created by dependence on coal:<\/p>\n

Effects of mining coal<\/strong>: Deforestation, soil erosion, water\u0412\u00a0shortages, coal fires, greenhouse gas emissions, lower water tables,\u0412\u00a0destruction of mountains, dust particles and debris in surrounding\u0412\u00a0communities, destruction of surrounding plant life, pollution of\u0412\u00a0nearby water bodies through runoff, displacement of communities due to\u0412\u00a0mining, coal fires, landslides and contaminated water supplies, plus\u0412\u00a0black lung disease.<\/p>\n

Effects of burning coal<\/strong>: Water shortages from cooling of power\u0412\u00a0plants and “washing” of coal, air pollution and smog, serious mercury\u0412\u00a0pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, acid rain, and widespread lung\u0412\u00a0disease from fine and ultrafine particles.\u0412<\/p>\n

Effects after burning<\/strong>: Abandoned mines, destroyed communities,\u0412\u00a0altered landscapes, soil damage and water pollution from acid mine\u0412\u00a0drainage, destruction of fish and aquatic animals, collapsing mines\u0412\u00a0causing structural damage to nearby roads, bridges and buildings,\u0412\u00a0kidney disease, and cancer, plus every year U.S. coal plants produce\u0412\u00a0120 million tons of toxic coal combustion wastes laced with lead,\u0412\u00a0arsenic and cadmium, most of which gets buried in the ground, creating\u0412\u00a0toxic time bombs.\u0412<\/p>\n

But the “reality coalition says only, “Coal cannot be considered clean\u0412\u00a0until its carbon dioxide emissions are captured and stored.”\u0412<\/p>\n

And: “No matter how much they say it in their advertising, coal can’t\u0412\u00a0truly be clean until the plants can capture the global warming\u0412\u00a0pollution.”<\/p>\n

Surely a coalition of major environmental groups can see that there is\u0412\u00a0more to cleaning up coal than merely burying CO2 in the ground.<\/p>\n

The “reality coalition” seems to be playing a dangerous game. The way\u0412\u00a0the “reality” campaign is framed, it invites the coal industry to meet\u0412\u00a0the challenge by merely creating a few “demonstration” projects, which\u0412\u00a0will then be used to claim that “clean coal” has arrived. Indeed, one\u0412\u00a0small “demonstration” plant is already operating in Germany, and coal\u0412\u00a0executives are already claiming it “demonstrates” that “clean coal” is\u0412\u00a0real.\u0412<\/p>\n

The “reality coalition” has not defined what would constitute an\u0412\u00a0“adequate demonstration” of “clean coal.” If the goal is to bury\u0412\u00a0trillions of tons of CO2 in the ground and keep it there for, say,\u0412\u00a02000 years — how could you demonstrate success? Yes, you can stick a\u0412\u00a0pipe in the ground and pump liquid CO2 into it for five years. But the\u0412\u00a0day you declare the demonstration a “success,” leakage could begin the\u0412\u00a0next day. So how can such a demonstration ever be declared a success?<\/p>\n

And if a demonstration occurs under laboratory conditions for a few\u0412\u00a0years, does that mean that trillions of tons of CO2 can then be\u0412\u00a0“safely” pumped into the ground for the next 50 years in China, India,\u0412\u00a0Russia and who knows where else? Are regulatory authorities in those\u0412\u00a0countries even as vigilant as the sleepy agencies we tolerate in the\u0412\u00a0U.S.?<\/p>\n

Unless we specify what constitutes an adequate demonstration of carbon\u0412\u00a0dioxide burial, and show that humans have the capacity to monitor\u0412\u00a0operations for the duration of the hazard, arguably a few thousand\u0412\u00a0years — which is something humans have never done before<\/strong> — we\u0412\u00a0will be allowing the coal industry to define what constitutes a “clean\u0412\u00a0coal” success story. It’s like asking a den of foxes to define\u0412\u00a0“adequate safety” in the henhouse.<\/p>\n

Pardon me for being skeptical, but one member of the “reality\u0412\u00a0coalition” — Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)– since 2005\u0412\u00a0has been the main cheerleader for the coal industry’s plan to\u0412\u00a0demonstrate “clean coal” without defining (a) what constitutes\u0412\u00a0“success,” and (b) what sort of institutional framework could provide\u0412\u00a0adequate regulatory oversight for the duration of the hazard. Indeed,\u0412\u00a0NRDC’s reckless slogan has been “CO2 capture and storage: Just do\u0412\u00a0it!” Has this leopard changed its spots?<\/p>\n

The rubber will meet the road the next time the coal industry and its\u0412\u00a0friends in government (like Barack Obama and Joe Biden) ask Congress\u0412\u00a0for $20 or $30 billion to pump CO2 into the ground for a few years as\u0412\u00a0a “demonstration” of clean coal. If the “reality coalition” doesn’t\u0412\u00a0oppose such give-aways to the coal industry, we’ll know they’re not\u0412\u00a0serious about making the coal industry demonstrate that clean coal is\u0412\u00a0technically feasible and<\/strong> economically viable. In the meantime,\u0412\u00a0it’s a dangerous game they are playing. A dangerous game.<\/p>\n

\u0412<\/p>\n

To see more photographs by Sean Hayes, <\/em>click here.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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.org\u0412\u00a0for environmental news. To see the article in its original format, click here. –RA [Rachel’s introduction: A new “reality coalition” has challenged the\u0412\u00a0coal … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"generate_page_header":""},"categories":[583],"tags":[36,742,741,52,117],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7492"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7492"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7492\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7492"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7492"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/planetwaves.net\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7492"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}