Futurgen? - Watch Out for the Hidden Footprint

The excitement of clean coal is getting attention here in Illinois!  The name of the project is Futurgen.  This will bring us jobs, put us on the cutting edge of new technology, and even make us the envy of our neighbors who struggle to be green.  That's right, Illinois is actually competing with Texas for the privilege of hosting  'an environmentally friendly way of burning coal', as reported in my local newspaper, The Naperville Sun.  For some reason, environmentally friendly burning of coal just sounds like an oxymoron - something like 'safe dog-fights.'   A little research indicates this project has been in the works for some time, and surprisingly, won't likely produce a watt of electricity until 2012.   I wonder what will be going on in the geo-eco- socio-political environment then?  Never mind, back to the point.

The problem I have with this venture are the incentives being offered to pollute our environment.  Did I say pollute?  Well, you see, despite what the MIT experts behind this project say, my intuitive knowledge of nature tells me there will be a price to pay.  Who will pay?  You guessed correctly - the future generations that are ironically implied as the beneficiaries.  The gist of this clean burning coal process is the CO2 and other combustion by-products will be stored ....  "deep"....underground in sandstone deposits.  Sounds like we are just burying our carbon footprint to me!  Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about open systems in general would understand that our eco-system will eventually re-establish its balance and these gases and other pollutants will find their way to the surface - to the environment we all use in our day-to-day activities.

So why are we really doing this?  For one thing, old habits die slowly.  55% of the electiricty in this country is generated by burning coal - clean or otherwise.  Instead of stepping outside of that box, we're just going to polish it up a bit.  Why?  Because we have lots of coal!  I dunno, is that a good thing?  We're just postpoing the inevitable - instead of finding a solution that works - long term.   Coal will eventually run out, just like oil - and both will continue to destroy our environment in the meantime.  Nuclear power on the other hand, provides hundreds of years of efficient and clean burning power.  Yes, there are by-products to contend with as well - yet, at least they are much, much more stable in their composition.  We definitely have choices to make.  Clean burning coal?   You wouldn't even be hearing about this if there wasn't so much federal money behind it - which is exactly why Illinois is matching that with their money - or should I say our money.  Illinois is even offering to insure those facilities against accidents!!  Why are they doing that?  I'm sorry, when something is right, it has to be right for everyone.  You shouldn't have to subsidize it in any way.  Who pays the price for all this - those little 'future gens' that we should be protecting with our foresight and wisdom.   

Comments

[Ray Reynolds]

Futurgen is absolutely not the final answer, but it does serve an enormous purpose in our quest for clean energey. Certainly it will not produce energy tomorrow. We didn't create this problem instantly and we won't solve it instantly either. In the scheme of things, five years is a drop in the bucket. This may not be "the" solution, but it beats sitting around waiting for a solution to magically appear. There are bound to be drawbacks and setbacks with this as with anything else. Sure, the carbon dioxide will eventually find its way back into our atmosphere, but isn't that what it is doing on a HUGE scale right now when we burn oil and coal in traditional ways? Civilization has always had this negative impact on the earth, it is just happening at a much greater scale as population increases. Maybe this method of containing the CO2 will hold it and allow it at least to enter the atmosphere at a slower rate so that nature can more easily deal with its impact. Futurgen and the process this project intends to implement are, at the very least, will buy us time to maintain our quest for truly renewable and completely environmentally friendly energy.

[Jeff Korhan]

Your comments are well taken. Progress is often less than perfect, but it beats the alternative of doing nothing. I'll be the first to admit we need to do what we can to keep the lights on while still endeavoring to protect our environment. The truth is we are in a bigger jam than many care to realize. So, any discussion in this regard is positive as it continues to raise awareness of the problem. Regardless of which solutions we run with, we are clearly standing behind the eight ball - i.e. there is no time to lose as the timetable for ramping up to just about any cleaner, renewable energy source is minimum 7 years away.