The Reality Blog

Coal’s “Clean” Conscience

The American Coalition of Clean Coal Technologies (ACCCE) spokesman — the same one who said “I don’t know” if burning coal contributes to global warming — put up an interesting op-ed last week.

It’s interesting because it makes clear the coal industry’s position — they aren’t willing to reduce their profits by taking real action on CO₂ reduction, and they aren’t too concerned about the high external costs of burning coal (in health care treatment, pollution, and global catastrophe) because they don’t directly pay these costs — we do.

ACCCE argues that “shifting the primary burden for reductions to coal-generated power clearly will drive up the costs and put a further dent into the wallets of families and business owners.” But that’s not true. It will drive up the costs to the coal industry, but it won’t be more expensive for consumers unless the industry passes on all of the costs by refusing to take a bite out of their $57 billion a year profit.

Furthermore, coal is responsible for more than 80% of the CO₂ that is released by producing electricity. No energy producer pollutes with CO₂ like coal. So there’s no “shifting” here — it’s ALREADY the coal industry’s burden, they’re just not accepting responsibility.

What do you think will be more costly to America’s families and business owners?

• A gradual reduction in burning coal, as we move to abundant, free and clean sources of energy and upgrade our buildings and appliances to use less energy.

• Increasing our present rate of burning coal: continuing to depend on an uncertain priced fossil fuel that releases the deadly poisons which, according to a 2004 study cited by the American Lung Association, are responsible for an estimated 24,000 premature deaths, 550,000 asthma attacks, 38,000 heart attacks and 12,000 other hospital admissions per year.

  And continuing to release the CO₂ that is heading us toward a collision with, as Time Magazine recently called it, the “asteroid” of global warming — which without action now “will be far worse — and last far longer — than any natural disaster humanity has ever known.”

ACCCE has told us their answer. What’s yours? If you’d like to comment on this article, you can quickly sign up for an account on the Tribune-Democrat’s discussion feature. Of course, you are always free to leave a comment at ACCCE’s blog, too.

Instead of more industry ads and op-ed articles about “clean” coal to make it seem like they are accepting responsibility, the coal industry needs to step up and do something real to solve this very real problem they have helped to create — without making threats to pass on all costs to the consumer.

The Dirt on “Clean”
Part 2: Less than 100 tons of poison

In part 1 of the Dirt on “Clean,” we introduced you to some of the reasons why the coal industry’s 77% cleaner claim is misleading — their omission of CO2, their sloppy chemistry that lumps different pollutants together, and their numbers manipulation that overstates reductions and hides emissions increases.

Of course, that’s just the beginning of what the coal industry isn’t telling you.

For starters, they don’t mention the poisons — toxic compounds like arsenic, mercury and lead that are all released by burning coal.

The coal industry conveniently doesn’t mention these hazardous pollutants alongside their 77% claim because they “did not track emissions of less than 100 tons per year.” Unfortunately for us, it takes a whole lot less than 100 tons of these poisons to do some serious damage.

What’s the Reality?
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS):

• 1/70th of a teaspoon of Mercury can be enough to make the fish in a 25-acre lake unsafe to eat.
• Water containing 50 parts per billion of Arsenic will cause cancer in 1 out of 100 people who drink it.

So how much of these poisons are emitted by coal? UCS estimates, each year, an average 500 MW power plant produces:

• 170 pounds of mercury
• 225 pounds of arsenic
• 114 pounds of lead
• 4 pounds of cadmium, trace amounts of uranium, other toxic heavy metals

Remember, there are about 600 coal-fired power plants operating in America today. Based on those per plant averages, that would be roughly 67 tons of arsenic, and 51 tons of mercury per year — but don’t worry, that’s way under their 100 ton tracking threshold.

And that’s just the pollution that goes into the air. The coal plant also produces toxic waste that doesn’t go up the smokestack. This coal ash and sludge is a super-toxic stew that includes all the compounds and waste that the coal industry has been forced to keep out of the air.

Most of this waste is stored in landfills and ponds at power-plants. Unfortunately, it doesn’t always stay there.

In December 2008, an embankment collapsed at a coal waste pond in Tennessee, resulting in 1.1 billion gallons of toxic sludge flowing across land and into the Emory River. And just last week, a smaller spill occurred into Maryland’s Potomac river when a coal ash pipe sprung a leak and wasn’t noticed for 12 hours.

The Environmental Protection Agency recently announced they would consider new regulations on such storage facilities. But the fact remains, there’s nothing “clean” or “77% cleaner” about “less than 100 tons” of arsenic, mercury or lead — whether it’s going up a smokestack, sitting in a storage pond, or polluting our lakes, rivers and lands.

But this is not the end of the Dirt on “Clean.” Next up, we’ll look at how the coal industry proudly touts their gains, while fighting tooth and nail for decades to avoid cleaning up their act.