marklynas.org'King Coal' makes a comeback 20 August 04
America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, holding a quarter of the world’s recoverable reserves. At 270 billion tonnes, that’s enough to last more than two centuries at current production rates. It’s also enough to cause grave damage to the world’s climate – coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel, pumping out far more carbon dioxide per unit of energy than both oil and natural gas. Now King Coal seems to be making a comeback. Presidential candidate John Kerry has been talking a lot of nonsense about ‘clean coal’ (an oxymoron if ever there was one), whilst the Bush administration has been quietly unravelling environmental regulations to ensure that new coal-burning plants can be constructed with fewer pollution safeguards. A recent Department of Energy study identified 94 new coal-fired plants in various stages of planning. If these are built, the United States will be locked into a dirty energy supply system for decades into the future.
Comments
Lynn Vincentnathan
August 20th, 2004 at 06:02 PM
In response to this issue I wrote:
Dear Sen. Kerry,
The main reason I would vote for you is you seem to be a bit better on environmental issues – which are killing millions of more people than terrorism, with global warming perhaps the most serious issue. An ocean methane “burp” caused by global warming could lead to runaway global warming and destroy 95% of Earth’s species, as happened in the past through natural causes. Millions have already been dying from droughts caused by global warming over the past 3 decades, especially in Africa, according to some studies. When all the glaciers melt by the end of next century, where will much of the world’s population get water to drink during the dry season, let alone grow crops?
We don’t need any more coal plants. We can even close down many that we have. Experts have found that we can reduce our energy needs without lowering productivity by 75%, even 90% in some cases, using current, off-the-shelf technology (see www.natcap.org and www.rmi.org ). My household has already lowered its energy use by half without lowering living standards, saving hundreds of dollars a year (much more than a Bush tax refund), and we are now on Green Mountain Energy’s 100% electricity at a couple of dollars more per month. We don’t need “clean” dirty coal. Why not promise the coal regions that you will bring clean and safe jobs to them, including work in the wind generator and solar industries.
Now with environmental issues about even between you and Bush, I can vote for Bush, who might reduce abortions….
LIFE IS MORE PRECIOUS THAN ANYTHING ELSE ON EARTH!
Now only if you bring Amory Lovins (enegry efficiency engineer and head of Rocky Mountain Institute) onto your team can you redeem yourself in my eyes….
Lynn Vincentnathan
Vicki Falde
August 26th, 2004 at 02:36 AM
The man is probably the greenest candidate to ever run for the Oval Office. His idea of a Manhattan Project-type push to develop alternative energies is good. I’m not sure he grasps how close the end of the oil age really is, but getting solid money and the best minds on rebuilding our world is a good one. (Don’t think the irony of global commitment to community-based societies has crossed his mind, either, but one thing at a time, I guess.) But he’s got to shake this belief in the “clean coal” myth—coal not being as bad as it could be is NOT an answer. Still, Kerry’s preferable to many; and ANYONE BUT BUSH!!